Abstract
Fifteen or 32 months after the verdict was announced in the O.J. Simpson murder trial, we asked college students about how they had heard the news, and we compared their responses with what they had told us 3 days after the verdict. Our study is the first to have assessed recollective accuracy at two different intervals more than 1 year after a noted public event. The quality of the recollections after 32 months was strikingly different from the quality of the recollections after 15 months. After 15 months, 50% of the recollections were highly accurate, and only 11% contained major errors or distortions. After 32 months, only 29% of the recollections were highly accurate, and more than 40% contained major distortions. Retention interval appears to be an important factor determining the frequency of memory distortions, and differences in the retention interval across studies may account for some of the contradictions in the flashbulb-memory literature. Metamemory errors and source memory difficulties are a likely basis of poor memory performance after long retention intervals. The results highlight the marked qualitative changes in recollections that can occur between 1 and 3 years after information has been acquired.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.