Talarico: 9/11 flashbulb memories vivid but less accurate than believed
A Lafayette College psychology professor published a commentary in The Conversation, republished by United Press International on September 11, examining how Americans form “flashbulb memories” of the September 11 attacks on the events’ 25th anniversary. The piece, by Jennifer Talarico, describes research she conducted showing that recollections of when and where one learned of a major public event are vivid but lose accuracy over time.
The commentary appears as media outlets, public officials and ordinary Americans mark a quarter century since attacks struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Virginia, and passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93 forced a crash in rural Pennsylvania. Talarico’s piece joins broader remembrance coverage by situating personal recollection alongside the historical record of the day.
Talarico writes that long-lasting and vivid flashbulb memories typically attach to mundane events like driving to work or cooking dinner. Those memories, she wrote, are made remarkable only due to their association with learning about remote and exceptional public events.
Talarico defines flashbulb memories as recollections of the moment and surrounding context in which someone learned of a public event, not as memories of direct involvement in the event itself. “Flashbulb memories are not memories of direct involvement in a newsworthy event,” she wrote. “Instead, they are recollections of the exact moment and surrounding context of when someone learned of the event.”
She contrasts that phenomenon with the vivid memories that form from direct experience. If someone lived through an earthquake, Talarico wrote, their memory is likely to include traumatic and vivid details of what they were doing when the earthquake struck — where they were, who they were with, and their thoughts and feelings at the time. The phenomenon of someone having a similarly strong memory when they have merely learned about an earthquake that occurred many miles away, she wrote, is what makes the flashbulb memory phenomenon significant.
In research conducted with a colleague, Talarico found that people forget details they originally included in written descriptions of flashbulb memories and introduce contradictory details at rates similar to those for ordinary memories. Even so, she wrote, “even if flashbulb memories are not quite as accurate as we believe them to be, the exceptional qualities they exhibit do seem to differentiate them from ordinary memories.”
For a public event to produce flashbulb memories, it generally must capture attention through novelty, disrupt ordinary life and evoke a strong emotional response, Talarico wrote. Newsworthy events occur every day, she wrote, and only some of those events lead to flashbulb memories. Research suggests events must be important within a person’s social group or relevant to their identity to become flashbulb memories, she wrote, and talking about and thinking about the event within a community reinforces the sense that the public event was important. When grandparents share their flashbulb memories with younger generations, she wrote, it helps communicate which historical events are important and what lessons can be drawn from those experiences.
Sharing a flashbulb memory of September 11 can serve as a demonstration of patriotism and connection with other Americans, Talarico wrote. “Having a vivid, detailed memory of the event serves to reinforce a person’s connection to the group,” she wrote. “In the context of the 9/11 attacks, sharing one’s flashbulb memory of that day can seem like a demonstration of patriotism and connection with other Americans.”
As an example, Talarico cites the recent recollections shared by Pennsylvania state legislators, who discussed where they were and what they were doing when the first plane struck the north tower of the World Trade Center, and the personal and political consequences of the day. Recounting where one was and what one was doing on September 11, she wrote, connects personal history to a broader history and can serve as a means of bearing witness.
Initially, people who actually experienced the event themselves tend to share their stories with each other, Talarico wrote. As time passes, listeners hear those stories as a way of learning about past events that they did not themselves live through. For those people, remembering 9/11 is about connecting the public and the personal to comprehend not just what occurred, but what it meant, she wrote. With each anniversary, the group of people with a personal connection diminishes until the event simply becomes a part of the historical past.
A common entreaty after tragedies is to “remember” or to “never forget” such historic events, Talarico wrote. “Remember the Alamo” and “Remember Pearl Harbor” are examples, along with the common refrain to “never forget” the Holocaust. Similarly, “never forget” became a solemn slogan to remember 9/11 immediately after the attacks.
Those refrains, Talarico wrote, “are often calls to honor those who were directly affected. In the case of 9/11, it’s a call to reflect on the lives lost and the loved ones left behind.” For some people, she wrote, this is a deeply personal act of mourning. For others, remembrance is a way of demonstrating respect and reverence for people they did not know but wish to commemorate.
As the event and its participants recede into the past, appeals to memory are often more abstract — calls to draw lessons and to shape future actions, Talarico wrote. Public memorials such as the 9/11 Memorial and Museum are often constructed to encourage those abstract types of remembering, she wrote.
The piece distinguishes factual recall of September 11 from flashbulb memories of how individual Americans learned of the attacks. The factual record, Talarico wrote, includes the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York, the attack on the Pentagon and the crash of Flight 93 after passengers thwarted another intended attack on Washington. Those are key components of what it means to know what happened, she wrote — but in many ways, they are the least important elements to commit to memory because the information is so readily available from other sources. Flashbulb memories of how an individual person heard about September 11 are unique, she wrote.
And those flashbulb memories differ from the factual memories that all Americans share about what transpired on that day, even if they were not alive when it occurred, Talarico wrote.
“What it means to remember 9/11 will depend on who is doing the remembering and what they are being asked to recall,” Talarico wrote. The traumatic memories of people who directly experienced the events in New York, Virginia and Shanksville, Pa., she wrote, are different from the flashbulb memories of people who learned about the events on that day from afar. Each form of remembering the day, she wrote, is important.
Jennifer Talarico is a professor of psychology at Lafayette College. This piece is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.