emotion and cognition Flashcards
what are flashbulb memories
A memory associated with a surprising emotionally arousing event, focusing more on the circumstances of learning about the event but not the event itself.
what were the participants of brown and kulik
80 american participants, 40 white 40 black to ask questions about 10 events
What year was Brown and Kulik
1977
Procedure of brown and kulik
- people were asked to fill out questionnaires about there recollection of hearing when famous people who had died unexpectedly.
- 9 of the events were assassinated or attempted assassinations of well known American personalities like martin luther john k kenedy etc.
- The tenth was a self-selected personal event that involved an unexpected shock that had personal relation to them but didn’t happen to them like the death of a friend etc
They were asked to recall the circumstances they were in during hearing the events
results of brown and kulik
Black participants had more flashbulb memories of tragedies related to civil rights leaders Then caucasian Americans
Most participants recalled a personal fbm which tended to be related to learning about the death of a parent.
- Brown and Kulik found that flashbulb memories tended to remain consistent over time, suggesting that emotional events may be remembered more accurately than less emotionally charged events.
They believed that flashbulb memories were more vivid reliable, and long-lasting recollections. There study supports the idea that emotions will create more long lasting vivid memories
evaluation of brown and kulik (negatives)
- They measured people’s memory decline early on and then much later so how can you measure the decline in memory when there was this big gap in between
- They failed to compare the memories to everyday memories to see if there was even a difference
- it is outdated
- This study has been debunked by more recent research
- participants were only from the usa which is quite bias so its not very generalizable,
Evalaution of brown and Kulik postives
- high ecological validity they had to recall real life events and everyone does go through something emotionally shocking at some point making it very relevant.
- it does support the role of emotion in memory to an extent because the findings did show that high emotional arousal enhanced memory encoding.
What year was Talarico and Rubin
2003
aim of talarico and rubin
Investigated whether FBMs are actually more accurate than regular memories.
aim of brown and kulik
to investigate the phenomenon of flashbulb memories and how emotional significance and personal relevance affect their formation.
Procedure for talarico and rubin
- 54 Duke University students were asked to recall their memories of 9/11 and an everyday event that occurred around the same time.
- They answered open-ended questions about where they were, what they were doing, and how they felt when they learned about the attack.
Participants were divided into three groups:
Group 1: Recalled their memories 1 week later
Group 2: Recalled their memories 6 weeks later
Group 3: Recalled their memories 32 weeks later
At each follow-up, they were asked the same questions about their 9/11 memory and their everyday memory.
The researchers compared participants’ new responses to their initial responses to assess accuracy.
Participants also rated their confidence in the accuracy of their memories.
results of talarico and rubin
Accuracy of both flashbulb and everyday memories declined over time at similar rates.
However, participants remained highly confident in their flashbulb memories, despite their inaccuracy.
This study challenged Brown & Kulik’s (1977) claim that flashbulb memories are immune to forgetting, showing instead that they are just as prone to distortion as regular memories. But that the confidence in the accuracy of there flashbulb memories is higher
Evaualtion of Talarico and rubin (Positives)
- It directly compared everyday memories with flashbulb allowing for a direct assessment of accuracy
- by using different groups at the recall they avoided rehearsal as much as possible
eval of talarico and rubin (negatives)
- the study was only american uni students which limits generalizability because people from different cultures and older adults may have recalled the emotional event differently
- no external verification - there was no way to see if there original recall actually happened to them making it hard to measure true accuracy.
- the study only focused on 9/11 so it may not be generalized to other emotional events.
What year was Sharot
(2007)
Aim of Sharot
To investigate the role of the amygdala in the formation of flashbulb memories (FBM) by examining brain activity in individuals who experienced the 9/11 attacks.
What does the amygdala controll in the brain
Major processing center for emotion, fight or flight and forms emotional memories
Sharot Procedure
24 participants who were in New York City during 9/11 were placed in an fMRI scanner.
They were shown cue words on a screen, some related to 9/11 (e.g., “September,” “New York”) and others related to neutral events (e.g., “summer,” “holiday”).
While recalling memories associated with these words, their brain activity was measured.
They were asked to rate their memories for vividness, confidence and accuracy and how much it evoked anxiety and physical arousal, how sure they were that they were accurate and how anxious they got in the recall
Results of Sharot
- They found that there was greater activity in the amygdala when words related to 911 were flashed or those who were close by
- Those who were further away had similar levels of activation to there baseline
- They did find that people who were closest to the attack had the greatest activation in the amygdala there was a correlation between proximity to the event and activation of the amygdala
What did Sharot show
This study demonstrates cognition and emotion because the closer that someone is to an unexpected event the more activity in their amygdala.
It shows how emotion and cognition are intertwined because it shows that the closer to the frightening event the more activation of the emotional amygdala and therefore the higher confidence in the memory.
Eval of Sharot (positives)
- sufficient biological evidence through brain scanning
- high internal validity - The FMRI procedure was very controlled reducing outside factors helping to support that the differences in brain activity were due to emotional significance and not external random factors.
- high eco validity - 9/11 acc happened and did spark a lot of emotions
Eval of Sharot (negatives)
- study shows correlation not causation - it does not prove that the amygdala causes FBMs to form. Other factors like rehearsal could contribute.
- small sample size - Only 24 participants from New York were studied, making it difficult to generalize findings to people from other cultures or those who did not experience 9/11.
- Participants were asked to rate their own memories, which relies on subjective self-reports rather than objective verification of accuracy.
overall what is the relationship between cognition and memory
When an event induces emotion it seems that you are hugely confident that what you remember is correct
General evaluation of Flashbulb memory
- Not fully testable under natural conditions because you cant measure someones emotional response in real time even though the studies are done on real people who have experienced real events.
- The level of emotional response is self reported which can be inconsistent.
- Level of rehearsal is difficult to measure and control
Its almost impossible to measure someone’s accuracy of their memories - There is cultural bias the whole theory relies a lot on people’s individual experiences, which can vary greatly between cultures - flashbulb memory can be characteristics of one’s specific culture
- There is a lot of biological evidence supporting it there are several studies done showing the activation of the amygdala and adrenaline
