{"id":11280,"date":"2018-07-19T14:24:18","date_gmt":"2018-07-19T05:24:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/themantic-education.com\/ibpsych\/?p=11280"},"modified":"2018-08-14T14:29:27","modified_gmt":"2018-08-14T05:29:27","slug":"key-study-fbm-across-cultures-by-kulkofsky-et-al-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.themantic-education.com\/ibpsych\/2018\/07\/19\/key-study-fbm-across-cultures-by-kulkofsky-et-al-2011\/","title":{"rendered":"Key Study: FBM across cultures by Kulkofsky et al. (2011)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Relevant Topics: Emotion and Cognition & Cultural Dimensions<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

This study compares flashbulb memory (FBM) formation across different cultures. It can be used to show the effects of one cultural dimension (individualism and collectivism) on behaviour (FBM formation). <\/em><\/p>\n

If you’re using FBM theory to explain how emotion can affect cognition, this could also be used in an essay as a counter-argument as it shows that culture could be a moderating variable.\u00a0<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Brown and Kulik\u2019s theory of flashbulb memory formation<\/span> defines FBMs as memories of the circumstances on is in when they hear or receive highly surprising or emotionally significant news.<\/em> It is not a memory of the event itself, but a memory of the <\/span>circumstances<\/span><\/i>\u00a0the person was in when they heard the news, including who they were with, how they found out about it, what they were doing and their emotional response to the news.<\/span><\/p>\n

Japanese during the March 11th earthquake, for instance,\u00a0 would not have FBMs of what happened during the earthquake. Rather, their FBM would be regarding hearing and\/or seeing the news regarding the tsunami, the nuclear disaster and other news regarding the effects of the earthquake.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

FBMs are by definition public events and nearly all FBM research has been conducted on events such as natural disasters, deaths of celebrities, political events (e.g. revolutions) and major public events (Hirst and Phelps, 2017; this article<\/a> has a good review of FBM theory in its opening paragraphs<\/em>).<\/p>\n

So FBMs are formed, says the theory, because of the emotional significance of an event. The significance, surprise, shock and\/or emotional impact will also impact the level of overt and covert rehearsal. <\/span><\/p>\n

So how would social and cultural factors influence FBM formation?<\/strong> <\/span><\/p>\n

Studies in the past have compared different levels of FBMs between groups of people to test the theory that the news must be emotional or significant. For instance, MLK assassination in the USA probably had a more emotional impact for black Americans than it did for most white Americans, so it\u2019s not surprising they formed more FBMs. According to the theory, they would have talked about it more and thought more often about it. For example, at work they might asked each other, “Where were you when you heard about it?” This is a form of rehearsal and will strengthen the memory. For social and cultural groups whom it affected less (e.g. white Americans), they would have been less likely to have such conversations.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

But what about FBMs across two very different types <\/i><\/strong>of cultures?<\/strong> <\/span><\/p>\n

To make sense of the study below, it’s useful to recap some key differences between Individualistic and Collectivist cultures<\/span>. One important difference to know about these two cultures is the extent to which they value the expression of emotion, group harmony and relationships. Collectivist cultures (particularly Japan and China) view the expression and experience of highly negative emotional events as potentially dangerous to established relationships. The individual\u2019s responses to emotional events and expressions of their feelings, especially negative ones, may result in damaging group harmony. This will limit the extent to which rehearsal takes place and thus could impact FBM formation.<\/span><\/p>\n

Who would form more FBMs, do you think – Japanese people or Americans?<\/span><\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

Description of Cross-Cultural Study (<\/b>Kulkofsky et al)<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

This study compared FBMs of 274 participants in five different countries (Individualism score \/100 in brackets): <\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. USA (91) , <\/span><\/li>\n
  2. UK (89),<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Germany (67).<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Turkey (37)<\/span><\/li>\n
  5. China (20), <\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The gender ratio was approximately 50:50, with ages from 32-65 from mainly middle-class communities. The participants were given five minutes to recall as many \u201cpublic events\u201d as they could. To do this they were asked to write one phrase about the event and then move on quickly to the next. There was a range of recall from 1 memory to 38 memories of public events.<\/span><\/p>\n

    After the participant recalled the memory, they were then asked if they remember the circumstances they were in when they heard about the memory. If they said yes, they moved on to the next section of questions – they were then asked five questions surrounding the event, and awarded 1 point for each they could remember. <\/span><\/p>\n

    They were: <\/span><\/p>\n