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

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.

Highly accurate prediction of emotions surrounding the attacks of September 11, 2001 over 1-, 2-, and 7-year prediction intervals.

“…For the features of age, gender, residence at the time of the attack, student membership at the time of the attack, political affiliation, race/ethnicity, and religion, there were no significant differences between those who completed all four surveys and (a) those who completed only the 2001 survey (see Hirst et al, 2015). Finally, although participants were recruited from across the United States, our sampling should not be viewed as representative of the American public.…”

Flashbulb Memories

“…As yet, such consistent findings have proven elusive. For instance, Talarico and Rubin (2003) and Hirst et al (2009, 2015) failed to find any correspondence between emotional state and consistency in their studies of FBMs of 9/11. Mahmood, Manier, and Hirst (2004) raised questions about distinctiveness by showing that the phenomenological quality of FBMs of the deaths of friends and lovers from AIDS remained the same whether one experienced multiple deaths or a single death.…”

“…Why is it that few Americans have trouble recollecting where they were when they learned about the attack of 9/11 (Hirst et al, 2015)? The specifics of the FBMs’ content may differ, but everyone has a memory.…”

Argentines’ collective memories of the military Junta of 1976: differences and similarities across generations and ideology

“…Indeed, people will correct their memories to conform to acknowledged facts. For instance, Hirst et al (2015) found that the errors people made about the facts surrounding 9/11 tended to be corrected over time, in large part, because the media supplied the necessary corrective material. To be sure, errors can persist (Lewandowsky, Stritzke, Oberauer, & Morales, 2005), but Schwartz is right that people's recollections do not occur in a factual vacuum.…”