![]() ![]() At least with regard to the rate of forgetting, many researchers now claim that FBMs are more similar than they are different from ordinary autobiographical memories. ![]() ![]() Subsequent to Brown and Kulik, researchers have corrected this lacunae, collecting data about the circumstances of learning of an event shortly after it occurs and then after a substantial delay (sometimes years). Researchers have mainly focused on two related issues: First, what are the mechanisms accounting for FBMs? For Brown and Kulik, the special quality of FBMs suggested that they involved special memory mechanisms, but they had no means of assessing at least one of the central features of FBMs that made them special: their seeming imperviousness to forgetting. They have also investigated events consequential to only a small group of people, such as the death of a friend or relative. Kennedy, public disasters, such as the Loma Prieta earthquake, and major political upheavals, such as the 9/11 terrorist attack. In an attempt to answer these questions, psychologists have studied events of consequence to the general public, for example, assassinations, such as that of John F. Why, Brown and Kulik wondered, should people remember something of such little consequence-the event may be consequential but is the circumstance of learning of the event also consequential? Why should the quality of these memories be superior to that of ordinary autobiographical memories? FBMs are often contrasted with event memories (EMs), that is, memories for facts about the public event. As Brown and Kulik noted in their seminal Flashbulb Memories ( Brown and Kulik 1977, cited under General Overviews), FBMs are vivid, detailed, confidently held, and seemingly impervious to forgetting. Flashbulb memories (FBMs) are memories for the circumstances in which one learned of a public, emotionally charged event. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |