Meredith
October 1» 2003
Herald
Volume XWI, Issue 6
Psychology professor’s research looks
at flashbulb memory
KRISTA
KEARNEY
Features Editor
Psychology profes
sor Mark O'DeKlrk's
recent study on
flashbulb memory
relating to terrorist
events on Sept. 11,
2001 reveals find
ings that are con
trary to popular
belief.
What is flashbulb mem
ory? The term is frequently
used, but rarely specifically
defined. Flashbulb memory
is defined by some
researchers as the result of
a specific set of variables: a
certain degree of surprise
about the event in question,
a feeling of personal rele
vance and connection to the
event, and intense emotion
al feelings towards the
event can all result in a
flashbulb memory. This
type of memory is one of
vivid, detailed images of
circumstantial evidence,
such as location, presence
of other people, and even
minute details such as the
clothing worn by the per
son recalling the event.
The question is often
whether traximatic events
leave an especially vibrant,
clear mark-a fiashbulb
memory- in the minds of
people who experience the
trauma. September 11,
2001, the day of terrorist
attacks on the US, is one
event in history many peo-
8.6 1
1: 2 months
2: 7monlhs
^ test interval ^
This figure illustrates O’DeKlrk’s findings.
Photo courtesy of Mark O'DeKirk
pie feel they can recall
vividly and explichly.
Researchers Mark
ODekirk, a professor of
psychology at Meredith,
and Paige King, 2003 grad
uate, set out on September
11, 2001 to determine the
accuracy of flashbulb mem
ories of the attacks in a
group of students in
O'Dekirk's Psychology 432
class.
Students entered their
class that morning at 9:30
a.m., just minutes atter
attacks on the World Trade
Center in New York.
Researchers O'Dekiric and
King asked students to
record their observations
while viewing television
reports of the attacks.
Students were asked to
answer questions about
where they were when they
first heard of the attacks,
who told them about the
attacks and their feelings
while viewing flie cover
age. Students were also
asked to record what cloth
ing they were wearing that
day. Two months later, and
again seven months later,
O'Oekirk and King asked
the group of students the
same questions to test their
recollection ability. They
also asked the students to
rate how confident they
were in the accuracy of
their answers on a scale of
one to ten.
The results revealed that
student's memories of the
day remained consistent
between two months and
seven months. However,
only 28% of the recollected
answers were completely
accurate. Of the other 72%
of answers, some were
completely incorrect and
many were more detailed
or less detailed than origi
nal answers. Students grew
more confident of the accu
racy of their answers as
time passed between two
months after the event to
seven months after the
event. At seven months,
students were significantly
more confident of their
memories than they were at
two months.
O’Dekirk's and King's
findings suggest that while
people think their flashbulb
memories are accurate long
after the event, studies
show that this is not true.
Memories become changed
by time by events that
occur after the fact. Trauma
or considerable emotional
impact from the event does
not ensure accurate recol
lection of the event.
"Overall, our findings
suggested that, over time,
people's 'flashbulb memory'
appears to NOT be immune
to foi^etting or to distor
tions even though their
confidence in that memory
increases with the passing
time. Even though the
event is very emotional and
people report that they will
"Never forget exactly where
I was when I heard...,' the
data suggest otherwise,"
O'Dekirk stated.
On the inside:
Campus
Christy’s
Features
Corner
Page 5
Page 8