Your memories of how you heard about 9/11 may well be wrong – we’ve been asking the same people what they remember for 25 years

How did you first learn of the attacks on September 11, 2001? Was it a panicked phone call from your mother, a roommate shaking you awake, or the anxious chatter on a commuter train? Research suggests that your memory may be around 40% inaccurate. These flashbulb memories, or personal details of how we learned about significant events, are not common for most news events.

However, for 9/11, people can still vividly recall their circumstances when they heard the news. Most Americans, however, did not experience the attacks firsthand. Thus, their memories of 9/11 include their unique experiences on that day. Memory is not a fixed archive; it is dynamic and vulnerable to change. As memory researchers, we know there is a high likelihood that about 40% of the details we remember about 9/11 may be incorrect.

People find it difficult to accept their memories changing, possibly because they expect confidence in memory accuracy to reflect its objective accuracy. Emotional events like 9/11 can lead to improved memory for a few key details and increased confidence in that memory, even if other details are poorly recalled. The social acknowledgment of sharing a memory can boost confidence in its accuracy.

This inflated confidence for flashbulb memories of 9/11 emerges because the event was highly emotional and people shared their experiences extensively. Memories that are believed to be accurate shape our identity and guide future actions. People often create a narrative that enhances their well-being and boosts confidence in their memory's accuracy.

Flashbulb memories bind us to our community and help shape our social identity as Americans. So, when recounting your 9/11 story, even if some details are not entirely accurate, the narrative you provide serves to bind you with other Americans, asserting and reinforcing our collective identity.