“Many studies of learning and memory have shown that attempting to recall information from memory improves your ability to recall it in the future,” Brown-Schmidt said. They also aid the notetaker in retaining more-though not necessarily more accurate-information than the notetaker’s conversational partner. The study found that written memoranda of conversations, or memcons-like Comey’s notes-may provide more details and be more accurate than the delayed recall of mutual conversation participants. In a high-stakes, he-said, he-said dispute like the conflicting accounts of Trump and Comey, who is to be believed? Whose testimony is most accurate? A recent study led by Sarah Brown-Schmidt, professor of psychology and human development at Vanderbilt University’s Peabody College of education and human development, may shed light on these questions. After he was fired, Comey asked a friend to publicly release excerpts of these notes, which, for the remainder of Trump’s presidency, became the topic of congressional testimonies and informed Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s investigation into whether President Trump committed obstruction of justice. Alarmed by how these meetings broke with traditional boundaries between presidents and FBI directors, Comey said he felt compelled to write contemporaneous notes of each meeting. In the first four months of Donald Trump’s presidency, leading up to Trump firing FBI director James Comey on May 9, 2017, they met privately nine times.
By Jenna Somers Sarah Brown-Schmidt, professor of psychology and human development
0 kommentar(er)
