I remember having a nightmare of C3PO chasing me throughout my house. That had to be before the age of four. Maybe it was my first nightmare.
I also have a memory of my parents offering me a toy if I was good at church. It was one of those toys where the penguins go down the slide, hit some automatic stairs, go up, and slide down again. For some reason, I chose to be bad, and went running down the aisle. I even remember what the aisle looks like. That had to be really early - I’m guessing two.
I have a memory of my dad taking me to daycare, and then Alvin and the Chipmunks were on the tv singing their themesong. “DO-DO-DODODO” That had to be before the age of 4.
I also have a memory of seeing “Oliver and Company” with two neighbor kids when I was really young. Once again it had to be before the age of four.
Don’t complain. I knew a man whose erliest memories dated back from when he was 10. All his childhood was just a black hole. And as far as he knew (or at least as far as he would tell me), nothing particular happened to him when he was 10 or before.
My oldest memories date back to when I was 3 1/2, during vacations. These include : seeing the place where a butcher slaughtered cattle and suspended carcasses, being very scared of steep stairs, and being forbidden to watch a firework from close distance (I was, and still am, fascinated by fireworks). All three events are likely to impress a little child.
These memories can be dated. On the other hand, a couple others I’m unable to date from the context. For all I know, I could have been 2. Or 3. Or 4. For instance, I remember complaining about eating seated in a baby chair (with the thing preventing the baby from falling) while I wanted to sit on a regular chair. I wouldn’t know when this happened, because there’s no contextual informations to date it.
Something wierd about early memories : a couple years ago, I was sorting out family pictures, and saw one which depicted me holding a little daffy duck in my arms. I suddenly remembered this toy, and also the texture and taste of its rubber beak, when I munched on it, emerged immediatly. And the picture didn’t show me biting the beak. As a consequence, I’m still wondering how many early memories are stored intact somewhere in the depths of my brain, unretrievable until something trigger them.
I’m not sure these memories are accurate, but I don’t see any reasons to boubt they’re real, since so many people have them. And they certainly can be independant of external output (and by the way, if they are related to, say, pictures, the existence of the picture can have maintained the memory rather than “created” it).
However, these memories are actually memories of memories of memories. For instance, in the examples I mentionned (fireworks, slaughterhouse, etc…), these memories weren’t created by external outputs, since I had to ask my parents past my 20 to be able to date them, and they didn’t remember these particular events (but they could identify the time and place where I could have seen carcasses suspended, for instance). But on the other hand, I only know that I used to remember these events. I can’t conjure anymore direct images or feelings, apart reconstructed. It’s a memory of a memory. But this is also true for much more recent memories, so i’m not sure there’s really a difference between the two.
On the other hand, my “duck’s beak taste” memory arose recently, and perfectly intact (though now, I can’t feel this taste anymore), or else I would have to assume that I inconsciously decided to create a memory of me biting the beak and of its taste on the spot. Which would be much weirder than assuming that it was indeed a real memory. So it had to be stored somewhere.
Three years and only 10% of the students got it right. 10% in only three years. From a major event that was shared. Now, how can anybody sit there and tell me that they think they can remember accurately things happening 20 years ago? I am sorry, all evidence shows that memory is unreliable and inaccurate.
So, it’s not impossible for someone to remember something from that time period. Secondly, the discussion of the Challenger disaster is pretty much meaningless because we’ve no idea what the students thoughts were on the space program before the disaster, nor how the disaster affected their feelings towards it afterwards. I’d wager that the students with the most accurate memories of the disaster were the ones who had the most interest in the space program and not people who paid little to know attention to it at all. It’s not an event like the assassination of President Kennedy, where everyone felt a strong emotional response for a significant period of time afterwards, or 9/11. The Challenger’s loss was an event which at best, had a transient effect on most people.
I’d wager that if Dr. Neisser had given those same questions to people who were onvolved in the space program in some manner, or highly interested in the space program, and then tested them 3 years later, they all come back with nearly the same answers as they had before. Everything that I’ve ever read on memory states that the importance of those events to the individual have a direct bearing on how well the memory is stored and can be recalled. At best, Dr. Neisser’s study tells us that a random group of individuals will remember events differently, this isn’t news.
No, I certainly am not saying it is impossible. Just rare for it to be uncorrupted. You could be right about the importance of an event. It certainly is something to consider.
Were the kids in the study three? I was three and a half when John Lennon died, and have a memory of hearing about that (I thought he was stabbed for years because I misunderstood my parents explaination of the news story) but I don’t remember Reagan being shot months later, just days before I turned four. Taking a history class years later, I was actually surprised to learn he’d been shot.
The biggest difference was that I liked the beatles a lot more than the president as a preschooler, since my parents played their music all the time, and it was more memorable because they were quite saddened by John’s death. I think Tuckerfan is right about some events being more meaningful to kids than others, and often for random reasons.
I was in Sixth grade when Lennon was shot. I had no idea of who the hell he was (yes, I’d heard of the Beatles, but I wasn’t particularly interested in their music, then, years later someone introduced me to pot, and the rest is a blur ), and I had seen on the news the day that he was shot that some scientist had been shot by a burgler and then later died. So at school, the next day, when everyone was talking about Lennon being shot, I thought that they were talking about the scientist. Eventually, I figured out what was going on, and then I shut the hell up, until I got home and was able to watch everything on TV about him (since that was about the only thing on TV), so I could talk about him the next day and not seem the total fool.
In answer to your question elfkin477 the subjects of the study were college students.
Sorry for the above hijack, but it’s what I remembered about Lennon being shot. See, that’s something odd about memories. My mind doesn’t remember me being struck with the horror of what happened, it remembers the awkwardness and humiliation I felt when I realized that it wasn’t the scientist everyone was talking about, but someone I’d never heard of.
“It is generally assumed that memories created with intense emotion like a personal tragedy or national tragedy like the Challenger shuttle explosion are exceptionally infallible.”
A few people died on a space ship. WHY is this anything more major to a young person than say watching a news report about a mass murder? A spacecraft blowing up just isn’t important to the life of a child. What would be would be the death of a parent. I can’t imagine anything much more traumatic to a child then seeing his/her mother die, or being told of their death. If memories can’t be formed before the age of 3, then I’d expect all children who had a parent die before the age of 3 would have no specific memories of that parent.
carterba permission granted to use that line in your dissertation. What is the subject of your dissertation?
Flashbulb memories have the problem of mixing up famous event and event of emotional importance. Famous events have shared recall - the “where were you” thing - but emotionally important events may not. As such famous events involve retelling the story in a context where other stories will be told. This alters the memory, including the actual facts of the event as opposed to the surrounding story.
There are experiments that focus on memories of emotional importance. For instance sports fans may be asked about the greatest sports moment they witnessed. In these cases the factual information tends to be fairly well retained, but confabulation has happened to the extraneous details. Relevance to the person combined with a limit on the exposure to alternate versions keeps away some of the other distortions.
I’m not aware of any particularly good books on memory as a whole. I’ll dig around for some of the better articles, and article summaries, for those who are interested in more. Basically memory is good at what it does. It just so happens that one of the things it doesn’t do is store crisp, unchanging records of the past.
This is going to sound bizarre, but a good book on how memory seems to work is The Memory Book by Harry Lorayne and Jerry Lucas. Yeah, Harry’s that weird old man you’ve seen on informercials (the ones without the juicer), but I read his book in high school and he does have a good grasp of what it takes to remember things. (Seriously, it’s because of him that I picture a tree with envelopes for fruit, riding on an airplane and that the Chinese word for “dormitory” is pronounced similar to sushi.)
I meant theory, not practice. Theory books often do mention ways to improve memory in passing. I still have stupid list items lodged in my brain from testing out methods of memorizing in classes.
Yeah, I know, but sometimes I’ve found you can learn more about a theory by putting it into practice than you can by reading a discussion of the theory.
I’ve never understood these discussions. Not believing anybody over 20 who claims to recall stuff of early childhood? Not that I disbelieve this - indeed I remember being no more than about twelve myself and having schoolmates tell me their memory started at age five!
But for me early childhood remains a wealth of memories. I know this because we moved from Sydney to a semi-rural beach town when I was four years and four months old. I can draw you a proper floorplan of the first house with reasonable room dimensions, and placement of furniture. I went back to that suburb as a teenager (out of curiosity) and not only did I find my way around, but it was never in any question. I haven’t been back, but I could do it again as easy as I could find my way around where I live today. I have THOUSANDS of detailed full-colour memories deom that first house. I don’t remember getting my nappy changed as such, but I remember having my back prickled on the rough sofa material. I told my mum years later, and she said, “I changed you on the sofa. I knew the material irritated you, so I’d lay (the old-fashioned non-disposable cloth) nappies down as a blanket for you. Sometimes, I was in a rush and I didn’t. That’s what you remember”.
I remember the picket fence between us and the next door neighbours house. They had two boys my age, Jason and Aaron, and they’d always be there at the fence wanting to play. I remember watching the black and white TV. It must have been boring daytime programming, coz I remember liking what must have been underwater or historical documentaries - “things about fish and old buildings” were my favourites. There are countless other vivid memories from that time. Too many to even begin to list.
I really can’t believe this “nothing before you’re five” stuff.
Well, if you believe everything everybody says, or believe that what they think could never be in error, I can see your point. Now, if you have read any of my links or any studies on memories, you will understand. Memory is fallible. Memory is not like data storage on a computer. It is not a perfect copy. So a memory may have some truth to it, or a memory may have been entirely invented, and the person may not even be aware of it.
As for the Challenger being a signifigant event? Well, it may not have been a big deal at the time, but there was a lot of talk about it, because it was signifigant socially. Kind of like 9/11. So what if a couple buildings fell in a city I have never been to.
Your claim that you have thousands of memories are meaningless without verifcation. Sorry, this is GQ, not IMHO. I am not going to take your word at face value. Especially since rigorous tests showing memories are easily alterable in police cases and the like. Here is an example: You claim you can draw a detailed floor plan of your early childhood home. I come over and watch you draw it. I take it to city hall and look up your old house. Do you really think they are going to match up? How do I know they are early childhood memories and not a recent memory when you visited it for nostalgic reasons? I mean, it is obvious that you have agenda- your desire for your memories to be accurate is evidence of that, and people with agendas will twist and turn to believe what they want, in the face of all evidence.
So, unless you can show some controlled studies that claim that memory may not be as questionable as all my links claim (and I can get a whole lot more, any phych class covers this in depth) then all your claims to the contrary are meaningless. A handful of questionable anectdotes isn’t going to overturn decades of studies and research. Sorry. Now if you have some cites for your claims, I think we could have something to discuss.
Oh, just for the record, I have already stated that it isn’t impossible to have memories that have truth to them. It don’t even think it is impossible that an old memory is fully accurate. Now, sorting the memory that is accurate out of the thousands of inaccurate, and hundreds of made up memories is the trick. With high odds, it is safer to take all memories with a grain of salt.
I can draw pretty close representations of some of my childhood homes too. Unfortunately I don’t think they would be 100% accurate. Missing a closet here, drawing a door wrong there. Etc. I have also been in homes similar to my childhood homes countless times and noted the similarites at the time. So I wouldn’t be drawing soely on childhood memories, but those memories as well.
I have a few memories that I am certain they are confabulations as well. Purely made up or altered. I have a few photos that prove some of my parents memories wrong.
Oh come on Epimetheus. I’m not trying to “prove” anything. Merely stating my own experience, and further stating that having a definite verifiable date (my being four years and four months of age) at which we moved house, that I may have something to contribute to the discussion.
My “Recent visit to the house for nostalgic reasons”, as you so condescendingly put it, took place about twenty years ago. That visit consisted of walking by down the street and seeing no more than the bland front of the house with its bay window. Now here I am two decades after that and I would be willing to provide a detailed internal floorplan. Bear in mind I have not seen inside the house since 1974. I am 34 years old.
What is it with the SDMB these days? I’m not trying to prove anything. If I had no memory before I was five, I’d give that as my experience in the interest of what this place stands for, in the interest of advancing the discussion… The fact is, I DO have thousands of memories of that house, and I’m not going to feel obliged to defend those to some random American on the internet. If you care to interview my elderly mother, or review municipal building plans, I’ll bet my memories against those as being accurate. If not, then don’t be so sure of yourself. You seem to be taking this way too personally.
When my older brother John was young (under 4, don’t remember exact age) he told my parents that he remembered being born. My parents asked him to describe it and his description sounded like he actually remembered. He has since forgotten that memory.
When I was about 4, my younger brother Luke got sick and had to go the hospital. I remember some of the events around that, like how his room was set up and how his hospital food looked. And what my brother and I were doing when he was rushed to the hospital. Later when I was in High School he developed leukemia and we talked about his previous illness and I found out my memories of the hospital and the events around him leaving for the hospital were correct. Oddly enough, I don’t remember the ambulence, just my parents being very worried.
I don’t remember my preschool at all. In fact, for a while I thought that I have never gone to a preschool. I remember kindergarten though.
I do not remember where I was when this recent space shuttle blew up. But I will always remember where I was when I found out my brother had leukemia. Or when I learned my aunt died. Or Sept 11 because I was supposed to fly that day.
I think a better study would have been to ask young kids right after 9-11 questions and then ask them 20 years later, particularly if they knew people involved in the tragedy.
No, I am not taking it personally. You are. I am stating fact, providing cites, and even allowing for eventualities. You are taking this personally. This is GQ, not IMHO. If you don’t like your stories called on, or questioned, don’t bring them into GQ and get mad when somebody compares them to studies. SDMB- Fighting ignorance and all that jazz.
), and I had seen on the news the day that he was shot that some scientist had been shot by a burgler and then later died. So at school, the next day, when everyone was talking about Lennon being shot, I thought that they were talking about the scientist. Eventually, I figured out what was going on, and then I shut the hell up, until I got home and was able to watch everything on TV about him (since that was about the only thing on TV), so I could talk about him the next day and not seem the total fool.