Flashbulb and Event Memory of September 11, 2001: Consistency, Confidence and Age Effects
Abstract
We used the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 to investigate if the formation, confidence, and nature of flashbulb memories were dependent on age. In addition, we compared the consistency over time of flashbulb memories with event memory, i.e., widely publicized factual details of the event, in a group of young respondents. College students (n=34, M age 24.8 yr.) were questioned 2 wk. after the attack and again 2 mo. later. At the later time, also a group of healthy elderly respondents (n=20, M age 70.5 yr.) was asked the same questions. Performance of young and old participants did not differ. Flashbulb memories were found without exception for both time periods and in both age groups. These memories had high confidence ratings and were described as very vivid. The original event was judged to have been accompanied by high emotion and rehearsal. In the college group, event memory, and to a smaller extent also flashbulb memory, decreased in accuracy already over the 2 mo. We conclude that flashbulb memories are a special case of normal episodic memory for emotional events. The creation of flashbulb memories, however, requires a special scenario of emotional arousal and rehearsal.
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?
If amygdala enhancement occurs while the hippocampus is in the stress-induced inhibitory period (phase 2), hippocampal impairment could compromise the accuracy of details of the emotional memory despite high confidence.
“However, if the enhancement of the amygdala processing occurs at a time when the hippocampus is in the stress-induced inhibitory period (Figure 3, phase 2), then the stress-induced impairment of hippocampal functioning could compromise the accuracy of the details of the emotional memory, despite an individual's great confidence in its veracity (Talarico and Rubin [443]; Wolters and Goudsmit [444];”
From The Temporal Dynamics Model of Emotional Memory Processing: A Synthesis on the Neurobiological Basis of Stress-Induced Amnesia, Flashbulb and Traumatic Memories, and the Yerkes-Dodson Law (2007) · cites this paper as Wolters and Goudsmit [444]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 35
- Authors
- Wolters, G., & Goudsmit, J. J.
- Affiliations
- Leiden University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Wolters, Gezinus
- Venue
- Psychological Reports
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 605-619
- ISSN
- 0033-2941 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-691X
- OpenAlex
- W2136299566
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 1.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Reports (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (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 › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
- Keywords
- flashbulb memory, event memory, September 11 attacks, age differences, memory confidence, memory vividness, emotional arousal, rehearsal, episodic memory, university students
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, September 11 Terrorist Attacks
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