Sharot et al. (2007)

Question 1

Aim

Answer 1

Determine the potential role of biological factors on flashbulb memories.

Question 2

Design, sample, procedure

Answer 2

The quasi-experiment was conducted three years after the attacks. The sample was made of participants who were in NYC on that day.

Participants were put into an fMRI> While in the scanner, they were presented with word cues on a screen along with another additional word which was either “Summer” or “September” to have the participants link the word to either summer holidays or the events of 9/11. Their brain activity would be observed as they recalled the event (the memories of personal events from the summer served as a baseline of brain activity for comparing to the 9/11 memories).

After the brain scanning session, participants were asked to rate their memories for vividness, detail, confidence in accuracy, and arousal. Participants were also asked to write a description of their personal memories. Only half of the participants reported having what would be called “flashbulb memories” of the event - that is, a greater sense of detail and strong confidence in the accuracy of the memory. Those that did report having flashbulb memories also reported that they were closer to the World Trade Centre on the day of the terrorist attack.

Question 3

Results and findings

Answer 3

Sharot and her team found that the activation of the amygdala for the participants who were downtown was higher when they recalled memories of the terrorist attack than when they recalled events from the preceding summer, whereas those participants who were further away from the event had equal levels of response in the amygdala when recalling both events.

These results suggest that close personal experience may be critical in engaging the neural mechanisms that produce the vivid memories characteristic of flashbulb memory.