Outline one theory of how emotion may affect one cognitive process [8]
Emotions are subjective feelings provoked by external or internal stimuli, and are
thought to be influenced by excitation of the nervous and endocrine systems. There
are many theories that explain the arousal of emotions and their purpose for human
behaviour; according to LeDoux, this arousal of emotion can the memory of events
that are encoded during this aroused state. Flashbulb memory is a special kind of
emotional memory, which refers to vivid and detailed memories that appear to be
recorded in the brain with a high degree of accuracy, like a photo. Brown and Kulik
proposed that emotion might be involved in flashbulb memory, suggesting that there
may be a neural mechanism which triggers an emotional arousal because the event is
unexpected or extremely important. At the time it was only a proposal, but now it is
supported by modern neuroscience, which suggests that emotional memories are
better remembered due to the critical role of the amygdala, which plays a role in
emotional processing.
A study by Yuille and Cutshall [1986] supported the theory of flashbulb memory by
investigating the accuracy in the memory recall of eyewitnesses to a real gun
shooting in response to questions asked over a period of time. There were 21 initial
participants to the scene who were questioned by police, and 13 agreed to take part
in the study, four to five months after the event. Participants were asked to rate their
stress levels at the time of the event on a seven-point scale, and they were also asked
whether they were experiencing any emotional distress at the time of the event, as
this may have influenced their memory recall. The researchers found 552 action
details reported by the participants related to the event, compared to the 392 found
by the police, and they found almost double the number of object details found by the
police. It as found that the eyewitnesses’ answers to the questions were highly
accurate, as they were able to recount a large number of correct details about the
event. Therefore, the study supports Flashbulb Memory Theory, as the researchers
found that even the use of leading questions had very little effect on the participants
recall. The researchers were able to find more details than the police, despite carrying
out their experiment 5-6 months later, showing that the memories formed of this
event were resistant to change or degradation over time. The very strong emotional
impact of the event is assumed to have played a critical role in the maintenance of
these memories.
Although Yuille and Cutshall’s study found that the memory of the gun shooting were
retained accurately by the participants, it is not always the case that flashbulb
memories are necessarily accurate. If the memory is encoded incorrectly during the
period of formation, it may mean that an incorrect memory is retained accurately.
Therefore it is important to remember that the vividness and accuracy of a memory
are not necessarily correlated.
Emotions are subjective feelings provoked by external or internal stimuli, and are
thought to be influenced by excitation of the nervous and endocrine systems. There
are many theories that explain the arousal of emotions and their purpose for human
behaviour; according to LeDoux, this arousal of emotion can the memory of events
that are encoded during this aroused state. Flashbulb memory is a special kind of
emotional memory, which refers to vivid and detailed memories that appear to be
recorded in the brain with a high degree of accuracy, like a photo. Brown and Kulik
proposed that emotion might be involved in flashbulb memory, suggesting that there
may be a neural mechanism which triggers an emotional arousal because the event is
unexpected or extremely important. At the time it was only a proposal, but now it is
supported by modern neuroscience, which suggests that emotional memories are
better remembered due to the critical role of the amygdala, which plays a role in
emotional processing.
A study by Yuille and Cutshall [1986] supported the theory of flashbulb memory by
investigating the accuracy in the memory recall of eyewitnesses to a real gun
shooting in response to questions asked over a period of time. There were 21 initial
participants to the scene who were questioned by police, and 13 agreed to take part
in the study, four to five months after the event. Participants were asked to rate their
stress levels at the time of the event on a seven-point scale, and they were also asked
whether they were experiencing any emotional distress at the time of the event, as
this may have influenced their memory recall. The researchers found 552 action
details reported by the participants related to the event, compared to the 392 found
by the police, and they found almost double the number of object details found by the
police. It as found that the eyewitnesses’ answers to the questions were highly
accurate, as they were able to recount a large number of correct details about the
event. Therefore, the study supports Flashbulb Memory Theory, as the researchers
found that even the use of leading questions had very little effect on the participants
recall. The researchers were able to find more details than the police, despite carrying
out their experiment 5-6 months later, showing that the memories formed of this
event were resistant to change or degradation over time. The very strong emotional
impact of the event is assumed to have played a critical role in the maintenance of
these memories.
Although Yuille and Cutshall’s study found that the memory of the gun shooting were
retained accurately by the participants, it is not always the case that flashbulb
memories are necessarily accurate. If the memory is encoded incorrectly during the
period of formation, it may mean that an incorrect memory is retained accurately.
Therefore it is important to remember that the vividness and accuracy of a memory
are not necessarily correlated.
