Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2015 Jun;144(3):604-23. doi: 10.1037/xge0000055. Epub 2015 Mar 9.

A ten-year follow-up of a study of memory for the attack of September 11, 2001: Flashbulb memories and memories for flashbulb events.

Author information

1
Department of Psychology.
2
Department of Psychology, New York University.
3
Department of Psychology, Georgetown University.
4
Department of Psychology, Yale University.
5
Department of Psychology, West Chester University.
6
Department of Psychology, Harvard University.
7
Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine.
8
Department of Psychology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
9
Department of Psychology, University of Michigan.
10
Department of Psychology, University of Southern California.
11
Department of Psychology, Columbia University.
12
Department of Psychology, Cambridge University.
13
Department of Psychology, University of Louisville.
14
Department of Psychology, Nova Southeastern University.
15
Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet.

Abstract

Within a week of the attack of September 11, 2001, a consortium of researchers from across the United States distributed a survey asking about the circumstances in which respondents learned of the attack (their flashbulb memories) and the facts about the attack itself (their event memories). Follow-up surveys were distributed 11, 25, and 119 months after the attack. The study, therefore, examines retention of flashbulb memories and event memories at a substantially longer retention interval than any previous study using a test-retest methodology, allowing for the study of such memories over the long term. There was rapid forgetting of both flashbulb and event memories within the first year, but the forgetting curves leveled off after that, not significantly changing even after a 10-year delay. Despite the initial rapid forgetting, confidence remained high throughout the 10-year period. Five putative factors affecting flashbulb memory consistency and event memory accuracy were examined: (a) attention to media, (b) the amount of discussion, (c) residency, (d) personal loss and/or inconvenience, and (e) emotional intensity. After 10 years, none of these factors predicted flashbulb memory consistency; media attention and ensuing conversation predicted event memory accuracy. Inconsistent flashbulb memories were more likely to be repeated rather than corrected over the 10-year period; inaccurate event memories, however, were more likely to be corrected. The findings suggest that even traumatic memories and those implicated in a community's collective identity may be inconsistent over time and these inconsistencies can persist without the corrective force of external influences.

PMID:
25751741
DOI:
10.1037/xge0000055
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for American Psychological Association
Loading ...
Support Center