Flashbulb Memories and the Talarico & Rubin Study

• Flashbulb memories are vivid, detailed snapshots of moments when surprising and personally relevant news is heard.
• Flashbulb memories are believed to be highly resistant to forgetting due to their emotional and personal nature.
• Flashbulb memories are a type of autobiographical memory.
• The accuracy of flashbulb memories is debatable; studies suggest they are not particularly accurate but are experienced with great confidence and vividness.

Talarico & Rubin (2003) Study

• Talarico and Rubin's 2003 study examined students' memories of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and everyday events.
• Both flashbulb and everyday memories declined in accuracy over time in the Talarico & Rubin study.
• The vividness and belief in accuracy decreased only for everyday memories.
• The power of emotion correlated with belief in accuracy, but not the actual accuracy of the memory.
• Talarico and Rubin concluded that flashbulb memories are not special in their accuracy, but in their perceived accuracy.

Neisser & Harsch (1992) Challenger Disaster Study

• Neisser & Harsch challenged the belief in the accuracy of flashbulb memories, arguing that these memories are prone to distortion.
• The Neisser & Harsch study focused on the Challenger disaster, where a space shuttle exploded on live television.
• The aim of the Neisser & Harsch study was to determine if flashbulb memories are susceptible to distortion.
• Participants, 106 Emory University students, completed a questionnaire about how they heard the news of the Challenger disaster less than 24 hours after it occurred.
• The questionnaire included questions about the time, location, and circumstances of hearing the news, as well as emotional responses.
• After 2.5 years, 44 of the original students completed the questionnaire again, rating their confidence in the accuracy of their memories.
• Only 25% of participants recalled filling out the previous questionnaire.
• Semi-structured interviews were conducted to determine if participants would repeat what they had written earlier or revert to their original memory.
• Participants were shown their original 1986 reports at the end of the interview.
• Discrepancies were observed between the original questionnaire and the follow-up 2.5 years later.
• Researchers scored the responses based on seven "content" questions, with a maximum score of seven.
• The mean score was 2.95/7.0, with eleven participants scoring 0 and only three scoring 7.
• Participants demonstrated a high level of confidence despite the lack of accuracy (average confidence level of 4.17).
• Additional cues had little effect on accuracy, and participants were surprised by the discrepancies when presented with their original questionnaires.

Evaluation of the Study

• The Neisser & Harsch study was a longitudinal and prospective case study.
• The study utilized method triangulation, as it employed both questionnaires and interviews; it could not be replicated
• A limitation of the study was participant attrition.
• The study had high ecological validity due to the lack of variable manipulation and controlled conditions.
• The study was naturalistic, making it difficult to eliminate the role of confounding variables.
• There was no control over participants' behavior between the first and second questionnaires.
• Demand characteristics may have inflated confidence levels.
• The findings of the study are transferable to other situations, as similar results have been found in studies of different events, such as 9/11.

Flashbulb memories are vivid, detailed snapshots of moments when surprising news is heard. A study by Talarico and Rubin examined memories of the 9/11 attacks. The study concluded that flashbulb memories are not special in their accuracy, but in their perceived accuracy.