(Schacter, 1996, p. 21) If one were an active participant in the situation, one"s memory of that situation would fall under the field category; if an observer of the same events, then the memory would be classed as observer.

             Freud contended that observer memories--which we view as a detached observer--are necessarily altered versions of the original episode, because our initial perception of an event takes place from a field perspective. Noting the frequency of the observer perspective in his patients' childhood recollections, Freud believed that he had strong evidence for the reconstructive nature of early memories. .

             (Schacter, 1996, p. 21).

             An observer memory is distorted because the individual is perceiving the events at secondhand. It is the old story of the witnesses to a robbery. Each person witnesses the identical event, but because of different visual and mental perspectives, each person remembers it differently. The capacity for distortion of observer memories is greatest in very young children. In addition to all the other disadvantages of being an observer, young children also suffer from a limited understanding of their environment. Frequently they do not yet have enough knowledge to comprehend what is actually happening. Furthermore in the case of an incident involving force or violence, a young child might feel, as well, more threatened as a result of her or his small size and physical weakness in comparison to the adult, or adults, participating in the observed event. Freud would have concluded that client bore witness to extremely traumatic events when a young child. As she reached her teen years, something happened that caused her to temporarily wipe these memories from her mind. And again, at the age of twenty-eight, when she was overtaken by complete paralysis and loss of speech, these terrible memories were very possibly "repeated" – the individual withdrawing into herself to avoid once again participating in them.