The role of importance/consequentiality appraisal in flashbulb memory formation: the case of the death of Pope John Paul II

Abstract

This study investigates how flashbulb memories (FBMs) relative to the death of Pope John Paul II vary according to the persons' evaluation of the event's importance and consequences. In particular, FBMs were investigated in persons who were expected to attribute different degrees of importance/ consequentiality to the event as a function of two factors: (1) religious involvement, (2) nationality (Polish, Italian, Swiss). The comparison was made with respect to the following hypothesized determinants of FBMs: surprise, emotional reaction, rehearsal, event memory and especially the attitudes towards the Pope and the appraisal of the importance and the consequences of his death. Structural equation modelling indicates that importance/consequentiality is a fundamental determinant of FBM and is influenced by antecedent personal and social characteristics reflected in the person's attitudes. Moreover, memory consistency seems to be both directly influenced by emotional intensity and indirectly through rehearsal, whereas surprise seems not a critical determinant of FBM.

Memory footprint: Predictors of flashbulb and event memories of the 2016 Euro Cup final

“…According to the authors, this lack of relationship explains why FBMs are often vivid and yet error-prone, whereas EMs tend to be corrected (notably, through media exposure). Nevertheless, this result stands in stark contrast with other existing work that have reported a significant positive association between EM and FBM (e.g., Finkenauer et al, 1998 ; Er, 2003 ; Tinti et al, 2009 ). In fact, EM has been pointed out as one of the most consistently significant predictors of FBM (see Luminet, 2018 for a review).…”

“…Importantly, as predicted, EM was a significant determinant of FBM ( Finkenauer et al, 1998 ; Er, 2003 ; Tinti et al, 2009 ; Hirst and Phelps, 2016 ; Luminet, 2018 ). It has been proposed that when learning about a new event, all information that constitutes that event, including the reception context, sensory and emotional information, and factual elements, are encoded in memory ( Tulving and Kroll, 1995 ).…”

Exploring the role of digital media dependency on the relationship between personal involvement and flashbulb memory during the pandemic: Empirical evidence from Mainland China

“…This study leads to a new perspective on FBM by transferring the concept of empathic involvement. However, which seems inconsistent with the previous FBM findings is that empathic involvement was negatively correlated with FBM specificity, compared to those who view personal involvement as some other forms such as social/ national membership (Kvavilashvili et al, 2003;Curci and Luminet, 2006;Tinti et al, 2009), political stance (Raw et al, 2021), and religious faith (Tinti et al, 2009;Curci et al, 2015).…”

Flashbulb memory: referring back to Brown and Kulik’s definition

“…Despite the fact that no previous studies have defined FBM as the presence of consistently recalled perceptual elements pertaining to the image captured by the flashbulb, the result reported here is in line with, and further extends, previous findings concerning the role of surprise in FBMs' formation. In fact, several studies have questioned the role of surprise as a necessary antecedent to FBM, showing that also expected events can trigger FBMs (Coluccia, Bianco, & Brandimonte, 2010;Curci & Luminet, 2009;Tinti et al, 2009). With regard to the significant paths, in support of our first hypothesis (HP1), we observed a significant link between the appraisal of novelty and surprise.…”