ABSTRACT

My goal in this chapter is to provide an answer to the puzzle about flashbulb memories that Neisser noticed a few years ago. Before I start down that path, however, I think I should put the chapter-opening quote in context. In 1989, Banaji and Crowder wrote an aggressive critique of naturalistic memory research in which they claimed that such work has found no important discoveries, generalizations, or theoretical understandings. They argued that naturalistic work, by its very nature, is unable to do so. In responding, Neisser (1991) noted a few findings from naturalistic research that he felt should qualify as valuable discoveries-Neisser also argued that these discoveries, based on the nature of the phenomena, would be impossible to document in traditional lab studies. One of the phenomena he discussed was that flashbulb memories, instead of being accurate, detailed, and long-lasting, are often entirely wrong. This led Neisser to ask why people have vivid autobiographical memories that are inaccurate.