Neisser and Harsch

• How many students were given a questionnaire on the morning of the Challenger disaster?

  106 students
• What were the participants asked to describe in the questionnaire after the Challenger disaster?

  How they heard the news of the disaster
• How long after the initial questionnaire were the participants given the same questionnaire again?

  Two and a half years later
• What scale was used to measure the participants' confidence in their memory accuracy?

  A scale of 1-5
• What was the mean score of accuracy for the participants' responses?


  Less than $\frac{3}{7}$ of the questions
• What was the mean level of confidence reported by the participants?

  $\frac{4}{5}$
• What did the structured interviews aim to determine about the participants' memories?

  If they would repeat what they had written or revert to the original memory
• What did the results of the study indicate about the relationship between confidence and flashbulb memory?

  The level of confidence defined the vividness of their flashbulb memory
• What are the strengths of the study on flashbulb memories?

  • There is biological evidence supporting that emotion affects memory
  • High ecological validity
• What are the limitations of the study on flashbulb memories?

  • Perception of how ‘special’ a memory is can lead to overestimation of accuracy
  • Rehearsal (post-911 news reports) may influence flashbulb memory development
  • Difficulty in objectively measuring emotional state at the time of the event