Reference no: EM1324424

Research that was done on flashbulb memories by Olivier Luminet argues that, "these memories are not any more accurate than other memories after a certain amount of time has passed." I think I must respectfully disagree. Our text states that flashbulb memories are "vivid, highly detailed memories that endure, apparently unchanged for many years" (Whitman, 2011). I really believe this is true. For instance, I have read biographies and personal accounts of passengers on board Titanic when it sank. Even after decades, those passengers could recall very specific details about the ship itself as well as the events following their hitting the iceberg. The same is true for those who survived the attack on Pearl Harbor. I had the opportunity to visit Pearl Harbor a few weeks ago, and I spoke with a veteran who was there on that day while we were aboard the Ferry that took us across to the Arizona Memorial. His memories were very detailed (especially for his age) and I could see him reliving it as he spoke. He even became emotional. My grandfather, although not at Pearl Harbor, spoke of the day it was bombed well into his 70's, recalling his personal memories of that day and the emotions he and his family felt.

Reference:

Whitman, D. (2011). Cognition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

1) Is there any reason why that particular research by (Olivier Luminet, (2008). on Flashbulb Memories would say that, "these memories are not any more accurate than other memories after a certain amount of time has passed"?

2) Do you think that there is any truth to this research? Why or why not?

3) Do you have any family members who have lived through events such as this?

4) Are they able to recall specific details about the event or their personal feelings about the events?