CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 50Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory, History, Trauma, IdentityMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration

Flashbulb memories, psychology and media studies: Fertile ground for interdisciplinarity?

Open access
Hoskins, Andrew·2009·Memory Studies
DOI 10.1177/1750698008102049
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The term ‘fl ashbulb memory’ (FBM) (Brown and Kulik 1977; Winograd and Neisser (eds) 1992; Conway 1995) describes human memory that can apparently be recalled very vividly and in great detail, as though reproduced directly from the original experience. Such memories are said to possess a ‘photographic’ quality, owing to the apparent visual clarity of the reproduction of the image in the mind’s eye. For instance, events that elicit a greater emotional response (e.g. from surprise or shock) and that are deemed to have greater (private and/or public) consequentiality, are frequently noted in psychological studies as key factors in strengthening FBMs (see Finkenauer et al., 1997). Yet, despite individuals’ confi dence in the accuracy of FBMs these are often found to be largely inaccurate or compiled from multiple sources and occasions. Indeed, measuring truth and falsity is a core pursuit of the psychology of FBMs, and, most often at the exclusion of consideration of the broader social, cultural and political impacts of the very phenomenon under investigation. Furthermore, there has been a great deal of critical refl ection on the usefulness of the FBM metaphor, as well as memory-media metaphors more widely (Brown and Kulik 1977; Draaisma 2000; Neisser 2008). Despite the vast majority of the proliferating FBM studies focusing on the personal memory of publicly mediated events, there appears to be: 1) very few accounts that engage with literature, theories and methods drawn from media and communication studies; 2) a lack of any meaningful engagement with FBM and FBM studies by media and communication scholars, other than passing reference to the metaphor and to Brown and Kulik (there are, of course, some notable exceptions, such as Bourdon [2003]); and, 3) an absence of accounts that have an ambition to interrogate FBM and media, as equivalent objects of study. Indeed, until very recently, the idea that some analysis of media content (and accounting for subjects’ exposure to that media content) was needed although sometimes acknowledged by the psychological core of FBM studies, was rarely developed. And, even when there is analysis of the media in shaping the memories of events and FBMs, this is often subsumed under, for example, ‘sociological, historical and, cultural issues’ (Luminet and Curci, 2009: i), or a ‘socio-interactional approach’ (Hirst and Meksen, 2009: 207–225). What, then, would a Media Studies’ take on FBM look like today? In relation to the FBM of public events, psychological approaches have focused on the mass media, and often exclusively television. Notably, this is the remembering of the

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1750698008102049

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The 'AI-based Testimony Response Device' appears to be owned by NHK without Mrs. Kajimoto having any specific ownership of the recorded content.

    “The ' AI-based Testimony Response Device ' appears to be owned by the broadcaster NHK who commissioned the project, without Mrs. Kajimoto having any specific ownership of the recorded content. 21”

    From AI and memory (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hoskins, A.
Affiliations
University of Warwick (GB)
Corresponding author
Hoskins, Andrew
ORCID
Hoskins, Andrew
Venue
Memory Studies
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-05
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
147-150
ISSN
  • 1750-6980 (ISSN-L)
  • 1750-6999
DOI
10.1177/1750698008102049
OpenAlex
W2049820415
Cited by
50
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Memory Studies (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Memory, History, Trauma, Identity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Keywords
flashbulb memory, interdisciplinarity, psychology of memory, media and memory, memory accuracy, emotional arousal, public events, media coverage of events, collective memory, media and politics

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