Neisser and Harsch (1992)


• Aim: 

  To determine whether flashbulb memories are susceptible to distortion.
• Research Method: 

  Longitudinal case study with method triangulation (questionnaires and interviews).
• Procedure:

  1. Initial questionnaire given to 106 Emory University students 24 hours after the Challenger disaster.
  2. Follow-up questionnaire given to 44 of the original participants 2.5 years later.
  3. Semi-structured interviews conducted a few months after the follow-up questionnaire.
• Results:

  1. Mean accuracy score: 2.95 out of 7.0
  2. 11 participants scored 0, 22 scored 2 or less, only 3 scored maximum 7.
  3. Average confidence level: 4.17 out of 5
  4. Significant discrepancies between original and follow-up responses
  5. Only 25% remembered filling out the original questionnaire
• Conclusion: 

  Flashbulb memories are prone to significant distortion over time, despite high confidence levels in their accuracy.
• Strengths:

  1. Longitudinal and Prospective Design: Allowed for tracking memory changes over time, reducing retrospective bias.
  2. Method Triangulation: Used both questionnaires and interviews, enhancing data validity.
  3. High Ecological Validity: Studied a real-life event without variable manipulation.
  4. Naturalistic Approach: Reflected real-world memory processes.
  5. Transferability: Similar results found in studies of other events (e.g., September 11th).
• Limitations:

  1. Limited Replicability: Case study nature makes exact replication difficult.
  2. Participant Attrition: Reduced sample size in follow-up (44 out of 106).
  3. Lack of Control for Confounding Variables: No control over participants' exposure to media or discussions about the event between tests.
  4. Potential Demand Characteristics: Confidence ratings might be inflated due to social desirability.
  5. Sample Bias: Participants were all university students, potentially limiting generalizability.