Brown & Kulik (1977):-
The aim of this study was to investigate whether dramatic, or personally significant events can cause "flashbulb" memories.The procedure was that the psychologists asked the 80 US test subjects a bunch of questions to asses their memory of what happened that day and how they found out about it. It was discovered that Flashbulb memory is more likely to occur when a person is faced with relevant shocking news. They concluded that dramatic events can cause a physiological imprinting of a memory of the event.The weakness when it comes to the study was that the data was collected through questioners,so it couldn't be accurate.
http://www.nickoh.com/emacs_files/psychology/ss_dir/brown_kulik1977.html
Neisser & Harsch (1992):-
The morning after the explosion of the Challenger,106 students were given a memory questionnaire. 21 and a half years later,44 of the students filled out a second questionnaire. A weighted accuracy score was calculated by comparing the two accounts on these elements, using a 3 point scale. The findings showed that memories had in fact dimmed. Of a potential 220 ‘facts’ produced in the original questionnaire, they were partially or completely wrong on 150 of them. They concluded that accuracy is not entirely there or not there at all.
Talarico & Rubin (2003) :-
On September 12 they gave 52 student volunteers a questionnaire about their memory of September 11 and an ordinary event of their choosing from the preceding few days. They then divided the volunteers into three groups, and had each group return for a follow-up questionnaire session after a different amount of time had gone by: 7 days, 42 days, and 224 days. In the follow-up session they were asked the same questions about their memories about both the ordinary event and the flashbulb memory. They found out that the memory of September 11 was much stronger than a memory of a normal day. They concluded that flashbulb memories are like any other memories. One limitation was that the data was collected through a questionnaire so it was impossible to be accurate.
http://pages.slc.edu/~ebj/iminds09/L10-constructive-memory/neisser-harsch.html
The aim of this study was to investigate whether dramatic, or personally significant events can cause "flashbulb" memories.The procedure was that the psychologists asked the 80 US test subjects a bunch of questions to asses their memory of what happened that day and how they found out about it. It was discovered that Flashbulb memory is more likely to occur when a person is faced with relevant shocking news. They concluded that dramatic events can cause a physiological imprinting of a memory of the event.The weakness when it comes to the study was that the data was collected through questioners,so it couldn't be accurate.
http://www.nickoh.com/emacs_files/psychology/ss_dir/brown_kulik1977.html
Neisser & Harsch (1992):-
The morning after the explosion of the Challenger,106 students were given a memory questionnaire. 21 and a half years later,44 of the students filled out a second questionnaire. A weighted accuracy score was calculated by comparing the two accounts on these elements, using a 3 point scale. The findings showed that memories had in fact dimmed. Of a potential 220 ‘facts’ produced in the original questionnaire, they were partially or completely wrong on 150 of them. They concluded that accuracy is not entirely there or not there at all.
Talarico & Rubin (2003) :-
On September 12 they gave 52 student volunteers a questionnaire about their memory of September 11 and an ordinary event of their choosing from the preceding few days. They then divided the volunteers into three groups, and had each group return for a follow-up questionnaire session after a different amount of time had gone by: 7 days, 42 days, and 224 days. In the follow-up session they were asked the same questions about their memories about both the ordinary event and the flashbulb memory. They found out that the memory of September 11 was much stronger than a memory of a normal day. They concluded that flashbulb memories are like any other memories. One limitation was that the data was collected through a questionnaire so it was impossible to be accurate.
http://pages.slc.edu/~ebj/iminds09/L10-constructive-memory/neisser-harsch.html
