This study examined personal memories of statements spoken in everyday contexts. Eighty college students completed a questionnaire in which they recounted the first spoken statement to come to mind, and statements made by a parent, teacher, sibling and friend.Respondents also provided information about the speakers and the circumstances of transmission. Content analyses identified six primary statement types: rules, evaluations, speaker information, pronouncements, unusual phrases and everyday speech. The incidence of different statement types varied across speakers. Memorability of a specific verbalization appears to be related to the statement's communicative function, the listener's reactions to the utterance, the speaker's gender, and the relationship between the speaker and the listener.Verbal interactions are an essential part of everyday existence. We discuss the day's plans with family members, chat with colleagues over lunch, follow the boss's orders, or confide in a close friend. While an occasional conversation has special significance, most are mundane, routine occurrences. Are specific statements remembered for long periods of time? What makes a spoken statement memorable? How are such statements organized in memory? The present study explored these questions.Laboratory research has indicated that the exact words of a statement endure in memory only long enough to process meaning, while memory for the gist of a statement is more long-lasting. Since the precise words uttered often are not essential for conveying meaning, the original sentence is lost as soon as its message is comprehended (Jarvella, 1971;Sachs, 1967).Experiments conducted in naturalistic settings challenge this basic premise. Several studies (Hjelmquist, 1984;Keenan, MacWhinney and Mayhew, 1977;Kintsch and Bates, 1977;MacWhinney, Keenan and Reinke, 1982) have shown a considerable degree of verbatim memory for spoken statements. One explanation for these findings is that the surface characteristics of everyday utterances are memorable because they convey valuable information about the speaker: 'By attending to the surface form and maintaining this information in memory, at least until the next encounter with the speaker, the listener can more accurately assess hidher sociolinguistic status vis-a-vis the speaker and hidher interactional commitments toward the speaker' (MacWhinney et al., 1982: 308 ). Surface details of spoken language may fade more quickly in laboratory contexts because the to-be-remembered stimuli and the test environment are impersonal.Experimental studies of memory for statements, including those conducted in natural settings, typically examine recognition accuracy, using a retention interval