The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Phantom flashbulbs: False recollections of hearing the news about Challenger
Abstract
When I first heard about the explosion I was sitting in my freshman dorm room with my roommate and we were watching TV. It came on a news flash and we were both totally shocked. I was really upset and I went upstairs to talk to a friend of mine and then I called my parents. I was in my religion class and some people walked in and started talking about [it]. I didn't know any details except that it had exploded and the schoolteacher's students had all been watching which I thought was so sad. Then after class I went to my room and watched the TV program talking about it and I got all the details from that. The two memories above are actual written responses to the question “How did you first hear the news of the Challenger disaster?” The first account was given in the fall of 1988, long after the event, by an Emory senior whom we will call “RT.” It was a vivid recollection, which met or exceeded all the standard tests of a “flashbulb memory.” Asked for 5-point confidence ratings of various aspects of the memory, RT hit the top of the scale: 5 on How did you hear it? (television), Where were you? (her room), What were you doing? (watching television), Who was with you? (roommate), and How did you feel? (shocked and upset).
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“For example, Neisser and Harsch reported high degrees of inconsistency for memories of hearing about the Challenger explosion three years previously.”
From Episodic memory, perceptual memory, and their interaction: Foundations for a theory of posttraumatic stress disorder. (2014) · cites this paper as Neisser & Harsch, 1992
In the citing paper
“Other articles, however, have emphasized that flashbulb memories may show evidence of inconsistency and are not always more consistent than non-flashbulb memories (Larsen, 1992; Neisser & Harsch, 1992; Talarico & Rubin, 2003; Talarico & Rubin, 2007).”
From Episodic memory, perceptual memory, and their interaction: Foundations for a theory of posttraumatic stress disorder. (2014) · cites this paper as Neisser & Harsch, 1992
In the citing paper
“It is quite possible, therefore, that multiple perceptual records are encoded so that, even if each one of them were perfectly accurate, inconsistency could arise from retrieving some of them and not others (Kvavilashvili, et al., 2009; Neisser & Harsch, 1992).”
From Episodic memory, perceptual memory, and their interaction: Foundations for a theory of posttraumatic stress disorder. (2014) · cites this paper as Neisser & Harsch, 1992
In the citing paper
“They concluded that flashbulb memories did not have special qualities but were likely ordinary memories that had been subject to additional rehearsal.”
From Episodic memory, perceptual memory, and their interaction: Foundations for a theory of posttraumatic stress disorder. (2014) · cites this paper as Neisser & Harsch, 1992
In the citing paper
“Flashbulb memories are usually recalled with a higher degree of confidence than other memories of equal age (Brown & Kulik, 1977;Talarico & Rubin, 2003), even when individuals are confronted with evidence that the event in memory could not have occurred as it is remembered (Neisser & Harsch, 1992).”
From Emotional Intensity Predicts Autobiographical Memory Experience (2004) · cites this paper as Neisser & Harsch, 1992
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Emotion and Cognition: Insights from Studies of the Human Amygdala
Phelps, E. A. (2006) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070234 · Cited by 1,798
Dissociation and the fragmentary nature of traumatic memories: Overview and exploratory study
van Der Kolk, B. A., & Fisler, R. (1995) · Journal of Traumatic Stress · doi:10.1002/jts.2490080402 · Cited by 1,262
“For example, Neisser and Harsch (1990) found that people changed their reco llections of the space shuttle Challenger disaster considerably after a number of years.”
BackgroundEmotional stress and eyewitness memory: A critical review
Christianson, S.-Å. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.284 · Cited by 1,174
“Loftus & Burns, 1982; Neisser & Harsch, 1990; Peters, 1988).”
Cognitive and neural mechanisms of emotional memory
Hamann, S. (2001) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01707-1 · Cited by 1,010
The reality of repressed memories.
Loftus, E. F. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.48.5.518 · Cited by 1,296
Metadata
- Authors
- Neisser, U., & Harsch, N.
- Affiliations
- Emory University (US)
- Venue
- Affect and Accuracy in Recall
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1992-10-30
- Pages
- 9-31
- OpenAlex
- W1541204951
- Cited by
- 493
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 9.73
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- 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
- flashbulb memory, false memory, Challenger disaster, memory distortion, eyewitness testimony, television news
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
