Comparing functions of and recollection with recently taken and recently deleted smartphone camera photos
Abstract
The current study examined why people take and delete photos with smartphone cameras, and participants' recollective experiences with saved and deleted photos. Two mixed‐methods surveys asked undergraduates (Study 1) and an international online sample (Study 2) to review both recently taken and recently deleted photos from their smartphones' photo album or trash bin. Participants recollected the photographed events for both types of photos and rated the quality of their recollections. Events recollected with saved photos were remembered more vividly, positively, and emotionally intensely compared to recollection with deleted photos. Participants also gave short responses about why they originally took both types of photos, as well as why they had deleted the recently deleted photos. Consistent with prior work, different photo‐taking goals were associated with different recollective experiences, especially for photos taken as mementos compared to photos taken to offload information.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Individuals may decide to delete recorded content, for instance, because a certain offloading goal has been completed or because one does not find the content esthetically pleasing enough.
“Third, individuals may decide to delete recorded content, for instance, because a certain offloading goal has been completed (e.g., one has ordered the product of which one had taken a photo) or because one does not find the content esthetically pleasing enough (Soares, 2023).”
From Understanding Autobiographical Memory in the Digital Age: The AMEDIA-Model (2024) · cites this paper as Soares, 2023
Cites
On Distinguishing Epistemic from Pragmatic Action
Kirsh, D., & Maglio, P. (1994) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1804_1 · Cited by 1,641 · see citing works
Risko, E. F., & Gilbert, S. J. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.002 · Cited by 1,502 · see citing works
Mediated Memories in the Digital Age
van Dijck, J. (2007) · doi:10.1515/9780804779517 · Cited by 777 · see citing works
Digital photography: communication, identity, memory
van Dijck, J. (2008) · Visual Communication · doi:10.1177/1470357207084865 · Cited by 508 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding Autobiographical Memory in the Digital Age: The AMEDIA-Model
Hutmacher, F., Appel, M., & Schwan, S. (2024) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2024.2384125 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Soares, J. S.
- Affiliations
- Mississippi State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Soares, Julia S.
- ORCID
- Soares, Julia S.
- Venue
- Applied Cognitive Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-03-31
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 699-710
- ISSN
- 0888-4080 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0720
- OpenAlex
- W4360983081
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3
- FWCI
- 1.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Cognitive Psychology (publishedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- recollection, Memento, offloading, memory vividness, emotional intensity, photo quality
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
