WEBVTT - Stickiness, Part 3 0:00:03.040 --> 0:00:07.040 Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio. 0:00:12.640 --> 0:00:14.680 Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. My name 0:00:14.720 --> 0:00:15.320 is Robert. 0:00:15.160 --> 0:00:18.119 Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick, and we're back with Part 0:00:18.280 --> 0:00:22.880 three of our series on the physical property of stickiness. 0:00:24.079 --> 0:00:25.360 Maybe you didn't know we were going to do a 0:00:25.360 --> 0:00:26.960 part three, Maybe we didn't know we were going to 0:00:26.960 --> 0:00:28.720 do a part three, but here we are back to 0:00:28.920 --> 0:00:30.000 finish it out today. 0:00:30.480 --> 0:00:30.760 Now. 0:00:30.880 --> 0:00:34.120 In Part one of this series, we talked about starches 0:00:34.159 --> 0:00:38.320 and sticky foods, most notably sticky rice aka sweet rice 0:00:38.479 --> 0:00:42.720 aka glutinous rice, a wonderful food stuff that has a 0:00:42.720 --> 0:00:46.360 lot of interesting chemical properties. And this sort of came 0:00:46.440 --> 0:00:50.800 up in the context of my inspiration for this series, 0:00:50.840 --> 0:00:55.160 which was, you know, my young child is eating fruits 0:00:55.200 --> 0:00:58.280 and fruit based foods and those tend to like leave 0:00:58.360 --> 0:01:02.279 mysterious sticky patches all over the house. Now, but so 0:01:02.320 --> 0:01:04.080 we did that in part one. In Part two, we 0:01:04.120 --> 0:01:08.000 talked about the unbelievably sticky feet of geckos, and we 0:01:08.040 --> 0:01:10.440 also talked about a chapter in a book I've been 0:01:10.480 --> 0:01:14.959 reading called Sticky, The Secret Science of Surfaces by Lori Winkless, 0:01:14.959 --> 0:01:18.280 which is out just this year. And this chapter talked 0:01:18.280 --> 0:01:22.400 about different ways that adhesive materials actually stick to one another. 0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:25.600 Seems like it is much more complicated and less well 0:01:25.680 --> 0:01:27.199 understood than you might guess. 0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:31.360 That's right. The one of the realities we keep coming 0:01:31.440 --> 0:01:35.400 up against in this series is that, yeah, the word 0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:38.760 sticky covers a lot of ground, and so you know, 0:01:38.840 --> 0:01:41.800 if you can't just narrow it down and say, oh, look, 0:01:41.880 --> 0:01:44.280 this is sticky and this is something else, like what 0:01:44.440 --> 0:01:47.120 kind of sticky? What flavor of sticky are you talking about? 0:01:47.160 --> 0:01:48.120 It's a very general turn. 0:01:48.640 --> 0:01:50.720 And as we come back to explore the topic for 0:01:50.760 --> 0:01:52.560 one more episode, I'm going to take us in a 0:01:52.880 --> 0:01:56.840 much less physical and more metaphorical direction because I got 0:01:56.960 --> 0:02:03.120 very interested in the idea of sticky mental content. What 0:02:03.280 --> 0:02:07.440 makes a memory or an idea stick in the mind. 0:02:07.840 --> 0:02:09.520 And of course this is a question that could be 0:02:09.560 --> 0:02:12.119 looked at a ton of different ways. I just isolated 0:02:12.200 --> 0:02:16.280 one facet of this issue because it was so interesting 0:02:16.320 --> 0:02:19.000 to me. What I want to talk about is something 0:02:19.280 --> 0:02:23.480 known as flash bulb memories. Rob, I wonder if you 0:02:23.560 --> 0:02:26.400 have similar experiences to this. I remember, when I was 0:02:26.480 --> 0:02:30.160 young hearing my parents and friends of theirs. People in 0:02:30.240 --> 0:02:33.079 my parents' age. You know, they'd be talking at a 0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:35.399 party or get together or something, and I remember them 0:02:35.560 --> 0:02:41.280 saying almost this exact sentence. I remember exactly where I 0:02:41.360 --> 0:02:43.639 was when I heard about the Kennedy assassination. 0:02:44.639 --> 0:02:48.080 Yeah, absolutely, I remember hearing the sort of thing growing up, 0:02:48.120 --> 0:02:51.919 and then of course post nine to eleven there were 0:02:52.040 --> 0:02:55.239 all new versions of this. Everyone not everyone, but a 0:02:55.240 --> 0:02:58.160 lot of people had a similar take. I remember exactly 0:02:58.200 --> 0:03:01.320 where I was, what I was wearing, what breakfast cereal, 0:03:01.760 --> 0:03:04.360 the ceial I was eating when this occurred. 0:03:04.080 --> 0:03:07.960 Right, exactly right. So in these types of memories, you 0:03:08.360 --> 0:03:11.760 find out about some public event that has happened, and 0:03:11.800 --> 0:03:13.760 you seem to have a memory of that moment of 0:03:13.800 --> 0:03:18.079 finding out that is just rich with incredible, vivid detail, 0:03:18.160 --> 0:03:22.200 and you have extreme confidence about the accuracy of those details. 0:03:22.800 --> 0:03:25.639 I remember my parents saying this about the Kennedy assassination, 0:03:25.880 --> 0:03:29.040 or people my parents were talking to. People our age, 0:03:29.080 --> 0:03:31.320 like you say, might have similar memories about the nine 0:03:31.320 --> 0:03:34.840 to eleven attacks. And if you're one of these people 0:03:34.880 --> 0:03:36.720 and you have a memory of this kind, you can 0:03:36.760 --> 0:03:39.960 almost like go back to that moment bodily right now. 0:03:40.000 --> 0:03:42.440 You remember exactly where you were, who you were with, 0:03:42.640 --> 0:03:46.160 how you heard about it and so forth. I actually 0:03:46.680 --> 0:03:50.480 do have a very clear and strong memory of finding 0:03:50.480 --> 0:03:52.640 out about the nine to eleven attacks in high school. 0:03:52.680 --> 0:03:56.120 I remember we were gathering for some kind of morning 0:03:56.160 --> 0:03:59.040 school assembly and I saw a friend of mine and 0:03:59.080 --> 0:04:02.080 I sat down next to him, and he mentioned that 0:04:02.160 --> 0:04:05.440 he had heard something. I think he think he said 0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:08.160 on the radio or something, but he said mentioned he 0:04:08.200 --> 0:04:11.000 had heard something about a plane hitting the World Trade Center. 0:04:11.480 --> 0:04:13.640 And I have no way of knowing now if this 0:04:13.800 --> 0:04:17.920 memory is actually accurate, but it feels extremely accurate. It 0:04:17.960 --> 0:04:19.960 has stuck in my mind like glue. 0:04:21.160 --> 0:04:23.720 Yeah, I mean, I have similar memories. But I also 0:04:23.760 --> 0:04:29.839 feel like we've covered the we've covered false memories enough 0:04:29.880 --> 0:04:33.599 on the show before, and we've discussed this exact scenario 0:04:34.480 --> 0:04:37.960 regarding these these memories that we think we can trust, 0:04:38.000 --> 0:04:42.560 but ultimately, upon close scrutiny, you know, the details fall apart. 0:04:42.880 --> 0:04:46.200 Like that's enough to where I really I probably distrust 0:04:46.200 --> 0:04:49.520 these memories more compared to other memories, just because I 0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:52.960 know the sort of thing that goes on with them, right, 0:04:53.000 --> 0:04:56.640 So I'm yeah, so I'm hesitant to really even state 0:04:56.680 --> 0:04:58.480 that I was wearing this or I was with so 0:04:58.560 --> 0:05:01.800 and so, and I even even even more recent examples 0:05:01.839 --> 0:05:04.000 of this sort of thing, like I remember where I 0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:07.520 was when I heard about the last presidential election results, 0:05:07.560 --> 0:05:11.800 that sort of thing. But when I pause to think 0:05:11.839 --> 0:05:14.159 about it for more than a moment and ask myself, well, 0:05:14.160 --> 0:05:15.799 do you really can you really name all the people 0:05:15.800 --> 0:05:19.279 that were there? Do you remember exactly where you were 0:05:19.720 --> 0:05:22.840 when you were finishing up this kayak excursion and then 0:05:22.880 --> 0:05:25.960 you somebody checked their phone and found the news. No, 0:05:26.320 --> 0:05:28.120 I'm not that confident in the memory. 0:05:28.160 --> 0:05:30.120 Well, yeah, I guess the irony is that, given how 0:05:30.200 --> 0:05:32.600 much we read about memory research and how much we've 0:05:32.640 --> 0:05:36.440 been primed by all of these studies finding you know, 0:05:36.520 --> 0:05:40.320 the illusory confidence people have in things. Yeah, maybe maybe 0:05:40.360 --> 0:05:44.479 the fact that it feels so so sticky in my 0:05:44.600 --> 0:05:47.440 brain makes me actually more suspicious of it. But people 0:05:47.480 --> 0:05:51.640 in general, I think, are mostly not suspicious of memories 0:05:51.680 --> 0:05:54.839 like this. People in general think, well, yeah, maybe memory 0:05:54.880 --> 0:05:58.480 is inaccurate sometimes. But one I'm absolutely certain about is 0:05:58.520 --> 0:06:01.080 I remember hearing about the Kennedy assassination, or you know, 0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:03.520 decades and decades later, or I remember where I was 0:06:03.560 --> 0:06:05.159 when I heard about nine to eleven. That is like 0:06:05.320 --> 0:06:09.000 the highest quality memory in my brain. And yet, given 0:06:09.279 --> 0:06:12.760 neither of these historical examples, you know, nine to eleven 0:06:13.080 --> 0:06:17.000 or the Kennedy assassination, do we usually have vivid, elaborate 0:06:17.040 --> 0:06:19.960 memories about other events the same week? You know, if 0:06:19.960 --> 0:06:22.680 you ask somebody who strongly remembers exactly how they heard 0:06:22.720 --> 0:06:26.400 about the Kennedy assassination, they don't have detailed memories of 0:06:26.440 --> 0:06:28.800 what they had for lunch the day before or what 0:06:28.839 --> 0:06:33.200 they did after school the day after. So what causes 0:06:33.279 --> 0:06:37.359 the details of a specific memory to become sticky in 0:06:37.440 --> 0:06:40.080 this way where it stays in your mind for, you know, 0:06:40.200 --> 0:06:43.320 sixty years later and still feels like it's in such 0:06:43.400 --> 0:06:46.640 incredibly vivid detail, like you know that you're remembering it 0:06:46.720 --> 0:06:50.800 exactly right. And why do these memories seem so accurate 0:06:50.880 --> 0:06:53.640 compared to our forgetfulness of other memories from around the 0:06:53.640 --> 0:06:56.599 same time in our lives. And why do these kinds 0:06:56.600 --> 0:07:01.039 of intense, detailed snapshot memories tend to be associated. Of course, 0:07:01.200 --> 0:07:04.360 we have similarly intense memories about other types of things, 0:07:04.680 --> 0:07:08.919 But why is a category for these intense vivid memories 0:07:09.440 --> 0:07:13.440 learning about a big, momentous public event, often a public tragedy. 0:07:14.120 --> 0:07:18.040 Another often cited example is the Challenger explosion, and it 0:07:18.080 --> 0:07:21.440 turns out psychologists have actually studied this phenomenon and have 0:07:21.560 --> 0:07:24.000 looked into these questions. They have firmer answers to some 0:07:24.040 --> 0:07:27.560 of these questions than other ones. These types of memories 0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:32.040 have a special name. They're called flash bulb memories. So 0:07:32.080 --> 0:07:34.040 I think the idea behind the name is it's kind 0:07:34.040 --> 0:07:37.600 of like there is a flash photograph taken in a 0:07:37.680 --> 0:07:40.600 darkened room, so everything around it is dark and obscure, 0:07:40.640 --> 0:07:43.040 but the flash goes off and a picture of a 0:07:43.080 --> 0:07:47.000 particular moment is captured and then frozen in memory, perhaps 0:07:47.000 --> 0:07:48.040 for the rest of your life. 0:07:48.720 --> 0:07:51.280 In fact, I think if we could ask JJ to 0:07:51.280 --> 0:07:53.680 do this, JJ, can you hit us with just the 0:07:54.120 --> 0:07:59.040 sound effect of a flash bulb, because many of you 0:07:59.080 --> 0:08:00.760 haven't heard it in real life life at this point 0:08:00.840 --> 0:08:03.120 or happened in a long time, but you've probably heard 0:08:03.160 --> 0:08:05.840 it in movies, often with kind of a freeze framed 0:08:05.880 --> 0:08:09.240 black and white effect, which does kind of get to 0:08:09.280 --> 0:08:10.880 the heart of it, like the idea that here is 0:08:10.960 --> 0:08:14.040 something has occurred and it is just you know, flash 0:08:14.040 --> 0:08:16.880 bulb sound effect. It is it is set in your 0:08:16.920 --> 0:08:20.320 mind and it will never change. This is a pristine 0:08:20.760 --> 0:08:22.040 memory of what is occurring. 0:08:22.400 --> 0:08:25.400 Okay, so time to mention a source. I've been reading 0:08:25.400 --> 0:08:29.960 a paper collecting and summarizing the research on flashbulb memories. 0:08:30.360 --> 0:08:33.960 This paper is called flashbulb Memories, published in Current Directions 0:08:33.960 --> 0:08:36.720 in Psychological Science in the year twenty sixteen, and this 0:08:36.800 --> 0:08:40.000 is by William Hurst and Elizabeth A. Phelps. So this 0:08:40.080 --> 0:08:41.920 is trying to look at all of the research that 0:08:41.960 --> 0:08:44.760 had been done up till that point and see what 0:08:44.840 --> 0:08:49.240 conclusions could be drawn. So the term flashbulb memories traces 0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:52.440 back to a pair of researchers named Roger Brown and 0:08:52.559 --> 0:08:57.480 James Koolick who studied the phenomenon and published important research 0:08:57.480 --> 0:09:00.560 on it in the year nineteen seventy seven. So to 0:09:00.640 --> 0:09:05.040 briefly separate out, just so there's no confusion what flash 0:09:05.080 --> 0:09:08.120 bold memories are and what they are not. Flash bold 0:09:08.120 --> 0:09:12.040 memories are memories of the circumstances in which one learned 0:09:12.080 --> 0:09:15.040 about a public event. So it's when you found out 0:09:15.480 --> 0:09:19.480 about a public event, and this differentiates it from first 0:09:19.480 --> 0:09:23.360 hand memories, like the kind of memory where you remember 0:09:23.600 --> 0:09:26.199 an event that happened to you personally, something you were 0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:29.160 there for, rather than something that you heard about or 0:09:29.160 --> 0:09:32.120 read about. So flash bold memories are kind of interesting 0:09:32.520 --> 0:09:35.839 that they straddle two different kinds of memory at the 0:09:35.880 --> 0:09:40.000 same time. In one sense, they are autobiographical because they're 0:09:40.080 --> 0:09:43.560 directly asking you to remember things about where you were 0:09:43.679 --> 0:09:46.400 and who you were with and what happened to you 0:09:46.559 --> 0:09:50.719 and what you felt. But they concern that that situation 0:09:50.800 --> 0:09:54.720 that you're remembering in your own life is elicited by 0:09:54.880 --> 0:09:58.040 a public event. It's not something that happened directly to you, 0:09:58.400 --> 0:10:01.520 but a moment of gaining in information, of learning about 0:10:01.559 --> 0:10:06.040 something that happened to other people. Another distinction is because 0:10:06.040 --> 0:10:10.199 their autobiographical flashbuld memories are different from what are called 0:10:10.480 --> 0:10:13.480 event memories in the literature. That name can be a 0:10:13.480 --> 0:10:15.840 little confusing because it's like, if you have a memory 0:10:15.880 --> 0:10:17.520 of an event in your life that sounds like that 0:10:17.559 --> 0:10:20.040 would be an event memory, but what this refers to 0:10:20.400 --> 0:10:24.719 is information about the public event itself. So you might 0:10:24.760 --> 0:10:28.160 have your flashbuld memory of finding out about the Kennedy assassination. 0:10:28.320 --> 0:10:30.439 That's where you were, how you heard about it, all 0:10:30.480 --> 0:10:34.400 that stuff. But then also there would be public event memories, 0:10:34.440 --> 0:10:36.760 which would be things like the date that had happened, 0:10:36.840 --> 0:10:39.120 what time of day, the city it took place in, 0:10:39.520 --> 0:10:42.400 what type of car Kennedy was riding, in the name 0:10:42.440 --> 0:10:44.520 of the alleged assassin, and so forth. This is like 0:10:44.640 --> 0:10:48.280 information about the eliciting event. That's also a different kind 0:10:48.280 --> 0:10:51.920 of memory. So the flash bold memory is an autobiographical 0:10:51.960 --> 0:10:55.240 memory about yourself in the circumstance of learning about this 0:10:55.360 --> 0:10:58.400 important public event. And examples of events that have been 0:10:58.440 --> 0:11:03.200 studied for creating slash bold memories include assassinations and other 0:11:03.320 --> 0:11:08.600 politically charged public events. Also things with a more positive connotation. 0:11:08.840 --> 0:11:12.320 The paper cited, like relevant World Cup victories like if 0:11:12.360 --> 0:11:15.880 your country wins the World Cup, also events like the 0:11:15.920 --> 0:11:19.520 fall of the Berlin Wall, and also natural disasters like 0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:20.559 major earthquakes. 0:11:21.400 --> 0:11:24.160 Okay, but at least some positive things thrun in the mix. 0:11:24.520 --> 0:11:27.400 A lot more negative things than positive things have been studied, 0:11:27.400 --> 0:11:29.520 and I want to talk about that later because that 0:11:29.600 --> 0:11:32.200 may be interesting. I wonder if there are differences in 0:11:32.280 --> 0:11:35.080 how those things are recorded. I guess the news that's 0:11:35.120 --> 0:11:38.880 worth reporting is more often bad than good, right right. 0:11:39.520 --> 0:11:42.640 So Brown and Kolick, the two researchers who did this 0:11:42.679 --> 0:11:45.840 important early work on flash bold memories, argued that even 0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:49.640 though these public events don't happen to us personally. They 0:11:49.880 --> 0:11:54.360 involve so much emotion that the brain records them kind 0:11:54.360 --> 0:11:57.240 of as if they did happen to us personally in 0:11:57.280 --> 0:11:59.760 the moment that we find out about them. So we 0:11:59.880 --> 0:12:04.000 have these unusual levels of accurate and exquisite detail. So 0:12:04.160 --> 0:12:06.600 ultimately they sort of said, these memories seem to be 0:12:06.679 --> 0:12:10.880 reliable and unchanging, like a photograph. In fact, the words 0:12:10.920 --> 0:12:13.600 they use, which are quoted in this review paper, they 0:12:13.640 --> 0:12:18.760 say these memories were quote unchanging as the slumbering rhine gold. 0:12:19.800 --> 0:12:23.440 Oh oh, that's nice. You know, it is interesting the 0:12:23.480 --> 0:12:26.440 idea that even though it doesn't happen to you directly, 0:12:26.960 --> 0:12:29.880 like through our media absorption, we do a lot of 0:12:29.920 --> 0:12:35.079 living vicariously through people in the media, celebrities and the 0:12:35.600 --> 0:12:38.280 public eye and so forth. And then I also wonder 0:12:38.320 --> 0:12:41.520 too you think about how we've evolved as a species 0:12:42.040 --> 0:12:46.119 and the sort of groups we are supposed to occupy, 0:12:46.520 --> 0:12:49.040 and the sort of information about said groups who would 0:12:49.080 --> 0:12:52.520 have like we didn't we didn't evolve to live in 0:12:52.559 --> 0:12:56.640 a continental or global society in which you could have 0:12:56.720 --> 0:13:01.760 something catastrophic occur that did not directly or potentially directly affect. 0:13:01.440 --> 0:13:04.240 You, right, I mean yeah, So I almost think there 0:13:04.679 --> 0:13:07.040 is maybe a mental switch that has to be flipped 0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:10.480 where we can like ignore most of the news we 0:13:10.640 --> 0:13:13.360 encounter as being like, well, that doesn't directly affect me. 0:13:13.679 --> 0:13:17.320 But for some reason, there's an emotional switch that you 0:13:17.360 --> 0:13:20.920 can flip where even if it doesn't directly affect your life, 0:13:21.520 --> 0:13:24.120 it's hit that emotion and now it feels like it 0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:26.360 does It feels like it happened. You know, something that 0:13:26.360 --> 0:13:29.080 happened to the president of the United States feels like 0:13:29.120 --> 0:13:31.920 it happened to the leader of your ten person band. 0:13:32.640 --> 0:13:34.840 Yeah, yeah, I guess there are a lot of moving 0:13:34.880 --> 0:13:36.880 parts here because you can also you know, draw in 0:13:36.960 --> 0:13:40.360 things like social norms and our you know, intense need 0:13:40.440 --> 0:13:43.440 to fit in socially with our given survival group and 0:13:43.480 --> 0:13:44.360 so forth. 0:13:44.679 --> 0:13:47.000 Right, maybe we can come back and speculate more on 0:13:47.040 --> 0:13:50.080 this when we finish with what the research has found. 0:13:50.080 --> 0:13:52.320 So what we have brown and cool, Like they say, 0:13:52.440 --> 0:13:55.800 these memories, they are as unchanging as the slumbering rine goal. 0:13:55.920 --> 0:13:58.480 Do you just remember what happened in that moment and 0:13:58.559 --> 0:14:00.600 it never changes the rest of your life. It is 0:14:00.640 --> 0:14:04.160 like the treasure the under the river, is that under 0:14:04.160 --> 0:14:06.160 the water being guarded by the Rhyine Maidens. 0:14:06.800 --> 0:14:08.720 Yes, yes, the three Rhine Maidens. 0:14:08.840 --> 0:14:11.520 But the authors of this review paper point out that 0:14:11.559 --> 0:14:15.480 Brown and Kulick didn't actually have information that would justify 0:14:15.480 --> 0:14:18.520 the claim that flash bold memories were unchanging as the 0:14:18.600 --> 0:14:22.360 Rhine gold because they had nothing to compare their subject's 0:14:22.360 --> 0:14:26.400 accounts too. Essentially, people would be prompted to recall a 0:14:26.440 --> 0:14:29.360 flash bold memory like do you have a memory of this, 0:14:30.200 --> 0:14:33.960 and then people would say, just like we've heard before, yes, 0:14:34.040 --> 0:14:36.880 I remember exactly where I was. This is how I 0:14:36.960 --> 0:14:40.760 found out, Here's what happened. Here are all the details. Now, 0:14:40.920 --> 0:14:43.880 in light of other findings in psychology that people can 0:14:44.080 --> 0:14:47.800 have the strong genuine impression of remembering things in ways 0:14:47.840 --> 0:14:52.600 that you can prove objectively are inaccurate, some researchers started 0:14:52.600 --> 0:14:56.240 to doubt whether these flash bold memories were actually as 0:14:56.280 --> 0:15:00.560 accurate as Brown and Kulick suggested and as act as 0:15:00.560 --> 0:15:03.200 people generally feel that they are in their own lives. 0:15:03.880 --> 0:15:06.400 But this would be a difficult thing to test, right, Like, 0:15:06.440 --> 0:15:09.400 what can you do? You can't follow people around twenty 0:15:09.400 --> 0:15:12.120 four to seven with a video camera and just wait 0:15:12.200 --> 0:15:14.720 for them to hear about a major public event and 0:15:14.760 --> 0:15:16.680 then test them on it later and compare it to 0:15:16.720 --> 0:15:22.440 the videotape that's obviously not feasible. So while testing the 0:15:22.880 --> 0:15:28.080 true accuracy of flash Bold memories to the direct events themselves, 0:15:28.120 --> 0:15:30.880 the moment people find out about these things, that would 0:15:30.880 --> 0:15:33.480 be extremely difficult. But researchers did come up with what 0:15:33.600 --> 0:15:36.440 I think is a very clever proxy, and it's very simple. 0:15:36.520 --> 0:15:41.520 Instead of testing accuracy, they would test consistency, and so 0:15:41.640 --> 0:15:45.480 this would work on the test retest method. So it 0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:48.400 works like this, as soon as possible after a major 0:15:48.440 --> 0:15:51.080 public event, the same day, if possible, or the very 0:15:51.120 --> 0:15:54.880 next day, you give people a questionnaire asking them to 0:15:55.040 --> 0:15:57.560 narrate how they found out and answer a whole bunch 0:15:57.560 --> 0:16:01.080 of autobiographical questions about that moment. You know, where were you, 0:16:01.200 --> 0:16:03.440 how did you hear about it, who was with you, 0:16:03.680 --> 0:16:06.960 and so forth, And then you just hold on to 0:16:07.080 --> 0:16:11.000 their answers to that questionnaire, and then after a delay, 0:16:11.280 --> 0:16:15.240 you give subsets of that initial sample group at different 0:16:15.280 --> 0:16:18.760 periods exactly the same questionnaire. So maybe a few days 0:16:18.800 --> 0:16:21.080 later some people will get it, maybe a few weeks later, 0:16:21.400 --> 0:16:24.080 a few months, even years down the road, and you 0:16:24.120 --> 0:16:28.360 simply compare their answers to the later questionnaire to what 0:16:28.400 --> 0:16:32.800 they said immediately after the event. So what do studies 0:16:32.840 --> 0:16:35.480 of this sort reveal. Well, the results are a little 0:16:35.480 --> 0:16:39.120 bit mixed. There were a few reports supporting some broad 0:16:39.240 --> 0:16:43.120 levels of consistency after delays, but the majority of these 0:16:43.120 --> 0:16:47.920 studies have found substantial changes to flash Bold memories over time, 0:16:48.480 --> 0:16:51.040 and for the most part, we have no idea that 0:16:51.120 --> 0:16:54.640 these changes are happening In our own brains. We remember 0:16:54.720 --> 0:16:58.200 the flash Bold moment one way a year later, and 0:16:58.280 --> 0:17:02.240 it feels intensely vivid, inaccurate, and we are sure this 0:17:02.280 --> 0:17:05.200 is exactly how it happened. We could not be wrong, 0:17:05.680 --> 0:17:08.040 but it's not what we said happened the same day 0:17:08.119 --> 0:17:11.280 or the day after. Now, I guess you could say 0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:14.119 it's possible that the first questionnaire is wrong, that the 0:17:14.160 --> 0:17:16.600 initial reports from right around the time of the event 0:17:16.680 --> 0:17:20.840 are not accurate. But if there are differences between what 0:17:20.920 --> 0:17:23.199 you remember the same day or the day after and 0:17:23.240 --> 0:17:26.159 what you remember a year later, is it likely that 0:17:26.200 --> 0:17:29.280 the memory from a year later is the more accurate one. 0:17:29.520 --> 0:17:33.120 I would tend to think no. And so while consistency 0:17:33.240 --> 0:17:36.360 is different from accuracy, I think it's a decent proxy 0:17:36.400 --> 0:17:36.760 for it. 0:17:37.400 --> 0:17:40.679 Yeah, absolutely, of course, This also brings me back to 0:17:40.760 --> 0:17:43.399 other memory of related topics we've discussed in terms of 0:17:43.680 --> 0:17:47.040 retrieval errors and the idea that every time you retrieve 0:17:47.080 --> 0:17:52.920 a memory, it is susceptible to change. So frequently retrieved memories, 0:17:53.240 --> 0:17:55.800 or the memories we retrieve the most, are also the 0:17:55.840 --> 0:17:58.919 ones that have been augmented the most. And I can 0:17:58.960 --> 0:18:01.560 imagine you have a synay, it's like, what is causing 0:18:01.600 --> 0:18:05.040 you to retrieve said memory, and the necessity of the 0:18:05.119 --> 0:18:10.640 retrieval then alters the surface of the memory retrieved. 0:18:10.760 --> 0:18:13.560 You know, yeah, yeah, I think that may well play 0:18:13.560 --> 0:18:15.800 a role in what's going on here, because there are 0:18:15.840 --> 0:18:20.480 patterns of how we treat different types of autobiographical memories, 0:18:20.800 --> 0:18:23.800 and these flashbulb moments are things that may well be 0:18:24.440 --> 0:18:30.280 sort of unusually rehearsed compared to other day to day memories. 0:18:30.800 --> 0:18:32.960 Yeah, yeah, And then think, for instance, they can be 0:18:33.400 --> 0:18:37.760 potentially altered by someone else retrieving said memory, someone else 0:18:37.800 --> 0:18:39.840 telling you where they were when such and such happen, 0:18:39.920 --> 0:18:42.600 And then you retrieve your story. But maybe it's a 0:18:42.640 --> 0:18:45.280 little bit different this time. Maybe it's a little more 0:18:45.520 --> 0:18:48.520 like the one you just heard, or it's sort of 0:18:48.560 --> 0:18:51.480 almost intentionally different in some regards compared to the one 0:18:51.480 --> 0:18:53.800 you just heard. There's so many ways you could slice it. 0:18:54.200 --> 0:18:56.280 Despite the fact that I think Brown and Kolick we're 0:18:56.280 --> 0:18:59.560 wrong about these memories being accurate and unchanging, or at 0:18:59.640 --> 0:19:03.400 least being wrong about them being unchanging, they did discover 0:19:03.600 --> 0:19:07.879 something important, which was that these memories are sticky in 0:19:08.000 --> 0:19:11.600 one sense. The research reveals the memories are sticky, but 0:19:11.640 --> 0:19:14.400 they're not sticky in the way that we think they are. 0:19:14.760 --> 0:19:17.159 They're sticky in the sense that they do stick in 0:19:17.240 --> 0:19:20.600 the memory, and we recall them later with great ease 0:19:20.640 --> 0:19:24.200 of retrieval and confidence in their details, and great depth 0:19:24.240 --> 0:19:27.520 of feeling about our ability to relive the moment. But 0:19:27.600 --> 0:19:30.679 they're not actually sticky in the sense of preserving the 0:19:30.760 --> 0:19:34.840 details of what happened on that day unchanged, at least 0:19:34.880 --> 0:19:37.119 not as well as it feels like they do. In 0:19:37.160 --> 0:19:39.840 the words of the authors of this review paper, Hurston 0:19:39.880 --> 0:19:43.800 Phelps quote Brown and Kulick, and researchers employing the test 0:19:43.880 --> 0:19:49.720 retest method are discussing two different claims about forgetting. Brown 0:19:49.760 --> 0:19:53.720 and Kulick treated forgetting as a failure to have a memory. 0:19:53.880 --> 0:19:57.120 You know, somebody's saying I can't remember anything whereas those 0:19:57.119 --> 0:20:01.680 employing a test retest methodology treat forgetting as a failure 0:20:01.760 --> 0:20:05.919 to remember the past consistently. When Brown and Kolik stated 0:20:05.920 --> 0:20:08.720 that there is no forgetting, they are right in the 0:20:08.760 --> 0:20:12.439 sense that most members of the public report having a 0:20:12.520 --> 0:20:16.399 memory even after ten years. That's not true about a 0:20:16.440 --> 0:20:19.320 whole lot that goes on in our lives. But then 0:20:19.320 --> 0:20:22.360 the authors go on as the test retest work indicates 0:20:22.600 --> 0:20:26.480 the memory may not be consistent, but it is long lasting. 0:20:27.440 --> 0:20:29.640 I think that's a really interesting distinction they're making. 0:20:30.560 --> 0:20:34.200 Yeah, yeah, there is something about the memory that is lasting, 0:20:34.680 --> 0:20:38.080 which raises the question why does it last? Why does 0:20:38.119 --> 0:20:41.160 it remain stuck to the fridge of memory even if 0:20:41.240 --> 0:20:45.280 the details of the node or the drawing or whatever 0:20:45.800 --> 0:20:47.560 have changed even substantially. 0:20:48.040 --> 0:20:50.359 I think that's a great question. So one thing I 0:20:50.400 --> 0:20:54.920 was fascinated by was details about how the memories change, 0:20:54.960 --> 0:20:59.120 like what actually changes about them. A few interesting observations 0:20:59.440 --> 0:21:03.679 they mentioned. One is that there is a type of 0:21:03.760 --> 0:21:06.919 consistency that emerges in how we remember these memories, but 0:21:06.960 --> 0:21:10.520 it's not consistency to the day to like the original event. 0:21:10.920 --> 0:21:14.000 The way they put it is, once a consistency emerges 0:21:14.119 --> 0:21:16.960 in our memory of a flash bulb event, it tends 0:21:17.000 --> 0:21:19.800 to stick. So I'm just making up this example. But 0:21:20.720 --> 0:21:25.080 for illustration, let's say you answer a questionnaire on the 0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:28.639 day of the event saying that you heard about the 0:21:28.640 --> 0:21:30.960 event because you were up in the morning by yourself 0:21:31.040 --> 0:21:33.080 making coffee and you heard about it on the radio 0:21:33.160 --> 0:21:35.320 in the kitchen, and you can give all these details 0:21:35.359 --> 0:21:38.639 about that. And then you do the same questionnaire a 0:21:38.680 --> 0:21:41.080 couple of months later, or even a few weeks later, 0:21:41.440 --> 0:21:43.280 and you say, you heard about it when you were 0:21:43.320 --> 0:21:47.040 stuck in traffic with your carpool group on the freeway 0:21:47.400 --> 0:21:48.919 on the way to work, and you heard about it 0:21:48.960 --> 0:21:52.320 on the radio. What the research tends to find is 0:21:52.520 --> 0:21:58.080 people will tend to pretty consistently reproduce the second story. 0:21:58.680 --> 0:22:01.720 So you ask them again years on and they will 0:22:01.760 --> 0:22:05.000 tell the same story they told in the later questionnaire, 0:22:05.280 --> 0:22:08.440 So that one tends to stick as if it were 0:22:08.480 --> 0:22:11.240 the original one, and people think it's the original one. 0:22:11.480 --> 0:22:14.560 But for some reason, there's this change that occurs early on, 0:22:14.760 --> 0:22:17.800 within the first year after the event. So it's kind 0:22:17.840 --> 0:22:21.640 of like there is a stickiness quality and a consistency equality. 0:22:21.640 --> 0:22:25.560