A Picture is Worth a Thousand Stories. What about a Memory?

By Jasmine Sagi

When we think about what makes us “us,” we often tell ourselves and others a narrative. This narrative may shift throughout our lifetime in accordance with countless factors, such as new experiences, new people we encounter, the number of times we tell the same story, etc. The common among these factors is that they all involve alterations of memory. In fact, every time we retrieve a piece of information from our memory, this memory no longer remains as it was, and the next time(s) we think about it we may not experience it as we did the previous time(s) (1). In extreme cases, we may remember something entirely different compared to the original event (2). In most cases, our memory will include variations from the original event to a lesser extent, but nonetheless variations.

The reason our long-term memory is so fickle lies within its architecture. Memories are represented as networks of neurons which communicate with one another. These networks may lay dormant until activation- to access a memory means to activate the network within which it is stored. Retrieval of a memory always occurs in a different context to that of its original creation, which means the network within which it is represented can create new connections with other neurons and networks, thereby adding new layers, possibly on the expense of the strengths of other networks (3). This phenomenon is possible thanks to the plasticity of our brain, and it is a double-edged sword; on one hand, it means we might not remember information accurately, but on the other hand, it allows a more flexible and adaptive thinking and functioning (4,5).

Our memories are the building blocks of our personality. What we remember and the way we remember it is what constitutes who we are. That said, given that memories in their nature are not immune to inaccuracies and distortions, they may not always represent reality as it was, and to learn reliably about one’s character we may need to turn to other sources. One of those possible sources is our photos.

In an increasingly documented world, nearly each and every one of us has countless photos of ourselves, of others which we took, of places we visited, and of objects of interest to us. These photos may document the highlights of our lives, such as a graduation ceremony, a wedding, or an exciting trip, but also day-to-day moments, such as a beautiful sunset, a photogenic meal, or a cat in an extremely adorable position. In addition to what a person chooses to capture, there is also an element of how they tend to capture it. For example, one individual may take a lot of selfies with their mouth closed, and another may take a lot of selfies with a wide smile. The way they choose to pose may also educate others as to how they perceive themselves and what they might want to portray (6).

The meaning of this is that by looking at one’s photos we can learn a great deal about who they are, or in other words, their personality. This raises an interesting question: when we want to know someone thoroughly, what source should we go to? What would give us a fuller, more reliable picture — the story they tell us about themselves (given that their intentions are honest), or their photos?

I mentioned earlier the concerns involved in relying on one’s personal narrative, but what about the concerns related to deducing one’s character based on their photos? There are a few selection biases that require addressing; first, we mostly have access to other people’s photos through what they choose to present to the world, for example via social media. People are aware that what they present to the world is somewhat of an invitation for judgment (7). This is why even those of us who tend to share our life in photos to a great extent, filter (at times literally) what ends up online. Therefore, most of what is eventually published is a partial representation of one’s personality. A second, and a more inherent bias, refers to what one actually chooses to capture. As mentioned above, we tend to document what seems meaningful to us, such as important events or day-to-day focal points. In other words, what we capture is what we wish to remember. It is quite understandable to not want to relive negative events or moments, let alone publish them. This links to a third selection bias, which is our ability to delete the pieces of documentation we no longer have a use for, those we wish to forget, or those we do not want to associate ourselves with anymore. For example, out of a sequence of selfies, we may delete the ones that do not portray us the way we want to be portrayed, or after a breakup we may seek to erase every reminder that the person we broke up with was ever a part of our life.

Taking into consideration the third bias, one may also wonder if photos also have a shaping effect over our memories, as to say that if we can remove certain things from our lives, whether by deleting a photo or throwing it away, can we also remove it from our memory? The answer is more complicated than a simple yes or no. Nevertheless, our memory does fade over time, unless it is being used, and in many cases, without the correct cue to activate the right network, we may never be able to retrieve some of our memories. Photos can unequivocally serve as retrieval cues, so in the absence of a certain photo the memory of the portrayed event may not be activated (8).

When trying to compare personal memories and photos as sources for comprehending one’s personality, we need to consider the reciprocal effects these two sources may have on each other. Combining a photo and the right social que can alter not just the way we feel about the photo, but the way we feel about the portrayed event and the way we remember it (9). For example, a photo that we liked just enough to share online may take on a whole different meaning if it is received well among our online friends. If it was highly popular, i.e., receiving many likes and positive comments, the context in which the photo was taken may be remembered as much more positive than what if actually felt like during the time we experienced it. Alternatively, a negative memory newly associated to a photo can certainly alter our feelings about the photo, and may even cause us to dispose of it, which in turn may result in elimination of a substantial retrieval cue.

In conclusion, photos may not yet be able to replace one’s personal narrative when trying to gain a comprehensive insight on one’s personality, but the possibility of looking at someone’s photos with little or no filter may provide us with a beneficial starting point.

References

1. Bjork, R. A. (1975). Retrieval as a memory modifier: An interpretation of negative recency and related phenomena. R. Solso (Ed.). Information processing and cognition: The Lojtola Symposium (pp. 123–144).

2. Brainerd, C. J. (2021). Deep memory distortions. Cognitive Psychology, 126, 101386.‏

3. McKenzie, S., & Eichenbaum, H. (2011). Consolidation and reconsolidation: two lives of memories?. Neuron, 71(2), 224–233.‏

4. Storm, B. C. (2011). The benefit of forgetting in thinking and remembering. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(5), 291–295.‏

5. Schacter, D. L., Guerin, S. A., & Jacques, P. L. S. (2011). Memory distortion: An adaptive perspective. Trends in cognitive sciences, 15(10), 467–474.‏

6. Holiday, S., Lewis, M. J., Nielsen, R., Anderson, H. D., & Elinzano, M. (2016). The selfie study: Archetypes and motivations in modern self-photography. Visual Communication Quarterly, 23(3), 175–187.‏

7. Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and individual differences, 54(3), 402–407.‏

8. Ridout, N., Dritschel, B., Matthews, K., & O’Carroll, R. (2016). Autobiographical memory specificity in response to verbal and pictorial cues in clinical depression. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 51, 109–115.‏

9. Blank, H., Walther, E., & Isemann, S. D. (2017). The past is a social construction: Susceptibility to social influence in (mis)remembering. In R. A. Nash & J. Ost (Eds.), False and distorted memories (pp. 55–71). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Jasmine Sagi is a researcher in the field of memory, cognition, metacognition, and emotion.

Her expertise covers the study of intervening effects on long-term memory accuracy.

Sagi is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in neurocognitive psychology from the University of Haifa, from which she also has a master’s degree in neurocognitive psychology.