Characteristics of Flashbulb Memories - Essay Example

Flashbulb Memories: Special Mechanism Introduction Flashbulb memories are the memories that are remembered vividly due to their fast occurrence. There has been a debate from the media and other social scholars on whether the September 11 2001 attack was a special mechanism or general mechanism. The study is based on the retired president’s bush recollection of the 9/11 attacks. The research’s hypothesis is that there is no significant relationship between phenomenon events and people’s memories. After the September 11 2001 attack commonly to as 9/11 attacks, there have been mixed misconceptions on whether it accounted to a general or special mechanism based on people’s memories (Greenburg, 2010).The attack was a special mechanism as opposed to general mechanism due to the confidence on people’s memories on how they remembered the exact details of the event, but when questioned after a short interval of time, they gave different stories from their previous answers. The 9/11 attacks cannot be a general mechanism because the event happened within a flash and even though people remember the event with outward confidence, they can hardly give the exact sequence of the attack. Characteristics of Flashbulb Memories Based on Greenburg (2010) Special mechanism exists where there is permanent record of the circumstances in a surprising event with several consequentiality. They are recalled with vagueness even after short passage of time. The special memories are normally recalled with outward confidence. The memories are occasionally remembered with a high-degree of confidence even with presence of varied evidences. The individuals also express a high degree of emotion when expressing their recall. Special mechanism memories are more coherent in narration with passage of time. Most people usually narrate the story in reference to where they were and the activities they were in at the time of the event. Evidence After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center building, the then president; President Bush, confidently reported that he remembered the exact details of the attack, which in subsequent speeches, were totally parallel. From the scope of flashbulb memories, this is an example of special mechanism; due to the use of total confidence in remembrance but the details are totally false. The president had three different versions of how he had about the news regarding the attacks. His responses had inconsistencies each-time he was interviewed by different agencies on different time zones (Greenburg, 2010). During his first interview on December 4th 2001 during a Florida visit, an audience by the name Jordan asked the president of how he felt about the 9/11 terrorist attack. The president confidently answered on how he and his chief of staff Andy Card witnessed the attack when they were in a classroom in Florida State. President Bush said they were outside the classroom when he personally saw an airplane crush the tower. This is an evidence of special mechanism due to the fact that the president boldly remembers the location he was and the activity he was undertaking, when the shocking and emotional event happened. In special mechanism unlike in general mechanism, people justify themselves on the remembrance of every detail including the environment they were in. George Bush having been a pilot himself exclaimed that the incident must have been so terrific that the pilot too must have been so incompetent. General mechanism occasionally lacks emotion attachment, where the individuals remember the details of event expressly without intense feelings. This is was a special mechanism because the president expressed emotions when he exclaimed that the incident was terrific. He continued that after awhile, the chief of staff informed him that yet another plane had hit the same building. At that point, before visiting the place; they both believed that the country was under attack. Emotions were additionally expressed; a characteristic is special mechanism, when they both believed that USA was under attack (Greenburg, 2010). Talarico & Rubin (2007) outline that after some time more precisely on December 20th the same year, journalists from Washington post also interviewed him pertaining to the fatal terrorist attack. The interview had a time period of 16 days from the actual day of the attack. On this day, the president gave a different story from the previous one. He started confidently by explaining how his senior advisor Karl Rove brought him the news. Bush recalls on how he was told that the accident was caused by a twin engine plane. This again illustrates the component of special mechanism on how George Bush boldly gave a different answer from the first interview within a very short period. Unlike general mechanism, it lacks inconsistency especially after a short timeframe. He continued that the plane was Boeing 767 an American Airline plane departing from Boston Logan Airport. According to the news that he was given, he assumed that it was a minor accident. The president further remembered that incident must have been caused by a pilot error. Bush illustrated that he conferred with his chief of staff; Andrew Card Jr., that the pilot must have had a heart attack. Unlike special mechanism, general mechanism has accuracy in consequentiality of events. Greenberg (2005) confirms that the following year on January 5th the president was giving out speech to audiences in California. Again on this particular day, someone from the crowd asked him on his subsequent reaction pertaining to the 9/11 attacks. The questioner specifically asked Bush about the first thing that came to his head during the first building plane crush. The president outlined that he was sitting while watching news briefings, when his chief of staff; Andy card, abruptly came and told him that America had been attacked. He believed that it could have been caused by the plane’s technical glitch. Further, it shows another inconsistency from his two speeches, within a time span of less than five months. Conclusion The narration concludes special mechanism due to the confidence portrayed by the ex president which varied in subsequent speeches. In his first speech he explains that he personally saw the plane crush; in his second speech which was two weeks later he outlined that he was informed by his chief of staff, and on the third speech, he said that he watching television when he was given the news. General mechanism provides clarity of memory especially when it was against a short time interval. Special mechanism has memory lapse even in short time intervals, due to acute occurrence of the event. References Greenburg, D. (2010). Untrustworthy Flashbulb Memories. 11(3):6-12. Talarico, J. & Rubin D. (2007). Flashbulb Memories Are Special After All; In Phenomenology, Not Accuracy. 21: 557-578. Greenberg, (2005). President Bush Flashbulb Memory 9/11/01. A Journal Of Experimental Psychology. 117: 171-181. Read More