Recovered-memory therapy (RMT) is controversial, largely because the practice is regarded by many memory experts as highly suggestible. However, we know little about how the public regards these practices. A sample of college students (N = 118) was randomly assigned to watch 1 of 4 videotaped enactments of a series of therapy sessions in which the client eventually reported a recovered memory of childhood sexual abuse. The therapy conditions were identical except for the level of suggestiveness employed by the therapist (i.e., control, expectation, guided imagery, hypnosis). The results indicated that participants in the expectation, guided-imagery, and hypnosis groups saw the therapist as significantly more suggestive than those in the control condition. However, participants judged the competency of the therapist and the veracity of the memory reports equally high across all 4 conditions. These findings suggest that the lay public may recognize the suggestive practices of therapists engaged in RMT, but they fail to see their relation to the accuracy of the memories reported by clients, or question the competence of the therapist.