Future research could improve upon Pezdeks 'enema' study, having an 'enema' is not a common experience (making it more comparable to CSA) and the 'memory'was unable to be planted. The study showing that "none of the subjects remembered this false event" (Loftus, et al. 1997) after the 'relative' told them what happened. We could improve the study by allowing the story to be told by the mother, this may change the 'believability' of the story because 'the mother was there' and 'the mother gave the enema', this may lead the subjects to 'remember'. Williams study could improve by verifying whether the abuse was genuinely forgotten (as 38% of the women in the study stated) or just not thought about, as previously suggested just because you don't think or talk about something doesn't mean you don't remember it.
It is unethical to plant memories of CSA in subjects, the only thing we can do is to improve on research that is already available by making the memories to be planted more comparable by using unusual events that will not cause the subject any distress.
…
