Do Flashbulb Memories Differ Essay Research Paper

memories. In a comparison of three studies of important news events such as the

resignation of including his own and the San Francisco earthquake (Neisser,

Winograd, and Weldon, 1991), Conway (1995) concluded that FMs may be mediated

by importance and/or emotion, but not rehersal. Conway used these studies as

support for the idea that encoding is special for flashbulb memorie and that

they are not purely the production of elaborate rehersal. Although Conway found In terms of accuracy of

flashbulb memories. Rehearsal is thought to serve different

functions for different memories. Smyth et al (1994) noted that some memories

successfully remain with us accurately for many years. They furthered that

these extended memories could be distinguished between memories that have used

over a period of time and emotionally charged flashbulb memories. Conway (1995)

suggests that rehearsal may serve to prevent these ordinary memories from

decaying while rehearsal within flashbulb memories acts to elaborate. It may be that ordinary memories require

preventative rehearsal due to their instability. Conway (1995) believed that

most autobiographical memories are unstable and dynamic requiring effortfull

maintenance. Conway & Anderson (1993) believe that ordinary memories are

constructed from different types of autobiographical knowledge and not directly

accessed as in a ?memory unit?. Flashbulb memories however are believed to

represent tightly organised and dense autobiographical knowledge. FMs are

therefore thought to be different to ordinary memories in their specificity of

knowledge and organisation within the brain.have suggested that there are In terms of

accuracy, Conway has pointed to the fact that Brown and Kulik never claimed

that FMs were perfect. Examples of personal FMs, those experienced

solely by individuals support Conway?s arguments of the speciality of encoding

being independent of rehearsal. Christianson and Nilson (1989) site the

unfortunate case of a rape victim who developed amnesia, supposedly motivated

as a removing the event from memory. However the victim was jogging a year

later when a sudden flashbulb memory or flashback was experienced. This was

cued by the victim noticing a similar brick pattern to that seen during the

attack. According to Conway and Brown & Kulik,

the differences between ordinary memory and FMs would be self evident in this

sort of incident. Due to their dense organisation, FMs can be compared to a

tightly wound spring in that they are hollistc.The issue of flashbulb memories being

indellible It appears therefore that FMs may as first

thought have a unique encoding mechanism that is independent of rehearsal.

Pilemer et al (1988) ? emotionIn conclusion, the distinction between FMs

and ordinary memories is in clear in places unfortunatly this difference is not

universal. There seems to be a fine line between vivid autobiographical

memories and flashbulb memories. There seems to be many factors influencing

flashbulb memory formation, however these have been broken down primarily to

personal consequentiallity, importance of an event and emotion. Surprise is

thought to be a significant factor that combines with the other three to

promote the ideal conditions for flashbulb memory formation. Conway (1994) has

concluded that during events importance interacts with emotion to form FMs.

Conway?s evaluation does not describe how vivid autobiographical memories may

represent different systems to flashbulb memories. The personal problem I have concerning the

distinctiveness of FMs was encountered recently. Whilst typing an essay, I

experienced an extremely vivid flashback to a time I had stopped in a service

station in Australia. I distinctly remember buying a green ice lolly, and what

the view was like out of the window. This event had little impact on my life

and I remember being completely relaxed at the time. I had been travelling for

a while and these stops were frequent enough to not be a ?first time

experience? and at the time could be considered mundane. On reading the

literature I struggled to find concrete information to ascertain if this

experience was a FM or just a very vivid autbiographical memory. The experience

had not been rehearsed, yet was brought back spontaneously with incredible

clarity more than two years on. Supporters of FMs would argue that this memory

In terms of long term potentiation this memory may LTP put in buffer zone activated by levels of

arousal or attention that were high for the entire trip. Once back in England,

the whole of that experience may have been related to personal importance and

Current life plans (Conway, 1995) and therefore what was not seen as important

at the time may have become so a few months later. Similarly my memories of

university so far seem quite vague, however it may that once my life plans

change in the future, some of these memories may be afforded flashbulb quality.

Perhaps many of these memories are of flashbulb quality, but are not remembered

at the moment as such as they have little consequence in an environment that is

constant. In my opinion there is a sliding continuum in

terms of flashbulb memories and other autobiographical memories. As mentioned,

autobiographical memories are thought to be arranged in a hierarchic structure

that involves levels of general and minuate. In my opinion, FMs represent the

formation of extreme memories that require little thought to remember. In this

way FMs may be qualitively different to ordinary memories, in that they are

simply higher on the scale of specificity. My argument therefore is that yes

flashbulb memories are different from ordinary mundane autobiographical memory.

As vivid memories are also distinct from mundane memories, FMs in my opinion

are not unique in their formation, longevity and clarity. Conway argued that the distinction of FMs and

autiobiographical memory is the reconstructive quality of ordinary memories.

However studies of patients within intensive care units (Jones, Griffiths &

Humphris, 2000) have shown that in the understandable unpleasant emotions

coupled with drugs enhances memory for internal events such as hypnogogic

hallucinations. Attention shifts during these hypnogogic images from the

external to the internal. Patients show poor recall for their external

environment, but vivid memories for the hallucinations and nightmares. Although

the authors use Conway?s suggested four variable interaction to explain the

events in terms of emotion and personal consequentiallity, the fact that these

vivid memories were constructed and not infact viewed independently may weaken

the difference between FMs and other autobiographical memories. It seems that FMs have been applied to so

many extreme memory phenomenon that they are a class of their own. Mauricio

& German (1999) have claimed that

to see flashbulb memories as being unique

and without parallel in psychology is wrong. They argue that psychologists should

consider flashbulb memories as being members of a ?broad family of experiences

that include drug flashbacks, palinopsia, palinacusis, posttraumatic memories,

and the vivid and haunting memories experienced by subjects with some forms of

mental disorder?. As the longevity and accuracy of memories involved with

posttraumatic stress disorder has been questioned (Baddeley, 1997)In conclusion there is considerable evidence

that humans do have memories that are extremely vivid, clear and long lasting.

However these FMs themselves