Transcript Conducting Researching After the 9/11 Terrorist

Emotional Reactions & Effects of
September 11, 2001
By Frank Salzillo and Erica Tortorice
CUNY Honors College
College of Staten Island
With the assistance of
Professor Charles Liu and Dr. Lorie Caudle
College of Staten Island
We present an introductory, in depth case study of a small group of family and friends on the September 11 terrorist attacks through comfortable, informal, questioning and
discussion. The sessions took place in casual settings and were recorded through audio media. It has been indicated by researchers that obtaining the often intimate information and
responses from people on a traumatic event can be very difficult and requires a large degree of effort and a unique relationship. (Silver, 2004) We utilized this insight and our own
approach of informal and comfortable interviews to produce this introductory case study on the emotional and mental reactions of September 11 on people from the New York
metropolitan area to better understand the immediate and lasting effects of that particular attack on New York City. We have concluded that there are no identical reactions,
memories, or emotions between people. Through comparison of emotional reactions and personal experiences that day, no two people have the same impression in every sense.
It has been reported that research about traumatic events can be a great challenge. Through her article Conducting Researching After the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks: Challenges and Results, Roxane Cohen Silver describes some specific difficulties. One of
which is the potential for government or community agencies that may stop any research, even on willing participants, as a form of protection of their personal interest. “As a result, studies are often conducted with small, nonrepresentative samples of
individuals who are willing to answer sensitive questions posed by a stranger (2).” Through conducting our own research, we assessed this challenge and looked to rectify it. Over a period of four weeks, we conducted eight voluntary interviews with close
family and friends. During these interviews, the subjects were asked a series of questions about their reactions to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. We were looking to assess the answers in comparison to one another, tracking common trends and in
some way looking to see if answers that we predicted were in fact true. We have hypothesized that the subjects would be open and honest about their answers, presenting them with passion and detail. From this openness and depth, we would be able to see
that no two people would have the exact same emotions when breaking through the surface of general answers. We thought that since no two people would have the exact same experience on that day and the days following, there would be no identical
answers.
Reactions to News Coverage
FS - Source of education
CD - Acceptable; broadcasters just doing their job
CS - It is both censored and a source of propaganda
DT- Excessive yet still views frequently
JB- Drawn to watching reruns of attack (sparks great emotion);
disagrees with context of news on War on Terror
SMGPGRT-
CS’s immediate reaction upon hearing the news was anger towards the American
government. She also immediately felt the urge to pick up her children from school. In
hindsight, she admits to evaluating her reactions several times and states that she was angry
because she felt as if she were misled into a sense of security created by her government. She
felt very strongly about not making any changes to her life or life style after the attacks.
There are no drastic precautions being taken, however there was a contact number with
someone outside of the United States who could act as a coordinator in case of an emergency.
In regard to political or world views, her political views have changed drastically by shifting
in political party. She feels that the news coverage was an act of government censorship and
somewhat seems to be a form of propaganda. Her most vivid memory is “plugging (her) TV
in, sitting in the auditorium of P.S. 13 and turning it on; not believing that (she) was watching
planes go through the buildings.”
The most remarkable part of this interview in our opinion was the immediate response of
anger towards the government, as opposed to anger towards the terrorists, as we would have
assumed.
CS’s immediate reaction upon hearing the news was anger towards the
American government. She also immediately felt the urge to pick up her
children from school. In hindsight, she admits to evaluating her reactions
several times and states that she was angry because she felt as if she were
misled into a sense of security created by her government. She felt very
strongly about not making any changes to her life or life style after the
attacks. There are no drastic precautions being taken, however there was a
contact number with someone outside of the United States who could act as
a coordinator in case of an emergency. In regard to political or world views,
her political views have changed drastically by shifting in political party. She
feels that the news coverage was an act of government censorship and
somewhat seems to be a form of propaganda. Her most vivid memory is
“plugging (her) TV in, sitting in the auditorium of P.S. 13 and turning it on; not
believing that (she) was watching planes go through the buildings.”
The most remarkable part of this interview in our opinion was the immediate
response of anger towards the government, as opposed to anger towards
the terrorists, as we would have assumed.
What were your immediate reactions?
What are your current thoughts about your reactions in
hindsight?
Were there any direct effects from September 11? (Location,
loss, etc.)
Prior to September 11, were you afraid of any attacks or
terrorist threats?
Are you currently anticipating or fearful of any future attacks
or terrorist threats?
Were there any alterations in your daily life immediately
following?
If so, are they still currently in practice?
Are there any precautions being taken in anticipation or fear of
any future attack or threats?
Did these events immediately effect your political or world
views? (Pacifist/pro-war, political party, etc.)
What were your reactions to the news coverage?
What is your most vivid memory?
Initials Age
C.S. 48
D.T. 46
R.T. 47
P.G. 46
S.M.G 48
J.B. 46
C.D. 44
F.S. 44
Sex Zip of Resdence Location of Residence Zip of Location on 9/11
Location on 9/11
Female
10305
Rosebank, Staten Island
10305
Rosebank, Staten Island
Female
10314
Willowbrook, Staten Island
10310
West Brighton, Staten Island
Male
10314
Willowbrook, Staten Island
10038
Lower East Side, Manhattan
Male
07002
Bayonne, NJ
New Jersey Turnpike
Female
07002
Bayonne, NJ
07002
Bayonne, NJ
Female
10002
Lower East Side, Manhattan
10002
Lower East Side, Manhattan
Male
10305
Rosebank, Staten Island
Staten Island Ferry to Manhattan
Male
10305
Rosebank, Staten Island
10301
St. George, Staten Island
CS’s immediate reaction upon hearing the news was anger towards the
American government. She also immediately felt the urge to pick up her
children from school. In hindsight, she admits to evaluating her reactions
several times and states that she was angry because she felt as if she were
misled into a sense of security created by her government. She felt very
strongly about not making any changes to her life or life style after the
attacks. There are no drastic precautions being taken, however there was a
contact number with someone outside of the United States who could act as
a coordinator in case of an emergency. In regard to political or world views,
her political views have changed drastically by shifting in political party. She
feels that the news coverage was an act of government censorship and
somewhat seems to be a form of propaganda. Her most vivid memory is
“plugging (her) TV in, sitting in the auditorium of P.S. 13 and turning it on; not
believing that (she) was watching planes go through the buildings.”
CS’s immediate reaction upon hearing the news was anger towards the
American government. She also immediately felt the urge to pick up her
children from school. In hindsight, she admits to evaluating her reactions
several times and states that she was angry because she felt as if she were
misled into a sense of security created by her government. She felt very
strongly about not making any changes to her life or life style after the
attacks. There are no drastic precautions being taken, however there was a
contact number with someone outside of the United States who could act as
a coordinator in case of an emergency. In regard to political or world views,
her political views have changed drastically by shifting in political party. She
feels that the news coverage was an act of government censorship and
somewhat seems to be a form of propaganda. Her most vivid memory is
“plugging (her) TV in, sitting in the auditorium of P.S. 13 and turning it on; not
believing that (she) was watching planes go through the buildings.”
The most remarkable part of this interview in our opinion was the immediate
response of anger towards the government, as opposed to anger towards
the terrorists, as we would have assumed.
The most remarkable part of this interview in our opinion was the immediate
response of anger towards the government, as opposed to anger towards
the terrorists, as we would have assumed.
JB’s immediate reaction was disbelief and she instantly felt horrible for the people in the
building without knowing what was happening. Looking back on that day she claims she
would have went home rather than to work after witnessing the attacks. Living on the Lower
East Side, she was greatly affected by the attacks by losing electricity, phone service, and
cable. Her job moved to New Jersey afterwards and her neighborhood was in lockdown for
about a week after the attacks. She lost a friend to the attacks and suffered from horrible air
quality of the area. She never thought America would be attacked like this but she does think
there will be future attacks although she does not live in fear of this. She is preparing for
another attack with extra cash, blankets, water, flashlights, a radio and dry food. Immediately
following the attacks her family tried to stay together at all times and they were very fearful
but these feelings and actions eventually lessoned, as she desired since she does not want to
live in fear. She claims that the attacks have made her a bit more prejudice than before and
that we must retaliate against nations that have anything to do with terrorists. She claims to
have been drawn to watching the news coverage although she still cries while watching
reruns. She does not agree with how the War on Terror is being covered. She most vividly
remembers watching the second tower get hit and feeling the extreme heat that surrounded it
at street level.
The remarkable aspect of this interview was how accepting this woman was of all the
changes to her lifestyle as a resident of the Lower East Side.
FS had watched the attacks live on TV but thought it was fake. Upon going up to the roof of
his building, Staten Island Borough Hall, he became aware of the reality of what was
happening as a result of the dust and smoke that was filling the air. At this point he felt great
fear but was eventually comforted by Vice-President Dick Cheney’s speech. The attack
greatly impacted his job as an engineer in charge of municipal buildings in New York City.
He now has to take every alarm seriously and had to form quick, effective methods of closing
off air supplies to buildings in the case of another attack. He also has trouble traveling to
Manhattan in his cargo van that is always subject to searching at the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel
and Verrazano Bridge but he personally is not making any changes to his life. He says that the
attacks changed everyone’s lifestyle by taking freedoms away, freedoms that he grew up with
and never thought a terrorist could take away. A firefighter he knows died in the buildings and
this has had an impact on his life. He strongly fears another attack and this has led him to
mistrust strangers a bit. The events led him to want America to have better relations with
nations that he previously did not even think about. He feels the news coverage is and was
acceptable and claims that it is his only source of knowledge on these events. He says that his
most vivid memory was watching the news broadcast the events as they unfolded especially
the people’s faces.
CS’s immediate reaction upon hearing the news was anger towards the
American government. She also immediately felt the urge to pick up her
children from school. In hindsight, she admits to evaluating her reactions
several times and states that she was angry because she felt as if she were
misled into a sense of security created by her government. She felt very
strongly about not making any changes to her life or life style after the
attacks. There are no drastic precautions being taken, however there was a
contact number with someone outside of the United States who could act as
a coordinator in case of an emergency. In regard to political or world views,
her political views have changed drastically by shifting in political party. She
feels that the news coverage was an act of government censorship and
somewhat seems to be a form of propaganda. Her most vivid memory is
“plugging (her) TV in, sitting in the auditorium of P.S. 13 and turning it on; not
believing that (she) was watching planes go through the buildings.”
The most remarkable part of this interview in our opinion was the immediate
response of anger towards the government, as opposed to anger towards
the terrorists, as we would have assumed.
CD was on the Staten Island Ferry as the first attack struck the Twin Towers and was getting
off the boat as he saw the second plane fly overhead and into the second tower. CD was very
emotional during the interview as he described helping people to board the ferry for a trip
back to Staten Island away from lower Manhattan. He never anticipated this attack but does
think that another attack will come although he refuses to live in fear of this or change his life
as a result. CD lost a very close friend in the towers and many other people he knew also lost
their lives in the attacks. The biggest change to his daily life came in that he can no longer put
his car on ferries to Manhattan. The attacks did not change any views he had but questions
why people would not want Americans to have freedom. He felt great amounts of news
coverage was acceptable since that is the job of news broadcasters and he tries to watch as
much of it on that war as possible while praying for the soldiers. His most vivid memory was
volunteering on the bucket brigaded in the recovery process.
The remarkable part of this interview was just how emotional the interviewee got while
speaking; the interview was stopped a few times for him to regroup himself.
The remarkable aspect of this interview was how concerned he was about losing freedoms,
freedoms that he doesn’t think will ever be returned.
The faculty advisors for this research project
were:
Professor Charles Liu
Department of Engineering, Science and Physics
College of Staten Island
Building 1N, Room 232
(718) 982- 2817
[email protected]
Dr. Lorie Caudle
Department of Psychology
College of Staten Island
Building 4S, Room 206
(718) 982-3778
[email protected]
The research was conducted by:
Frank Salzillo
[email protected]
Erica Tortorice
[email protected]
Resources
Silver, Roxane Cohen. “Conducting Research After the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks: Challenges and
Results”. Families, Systems, & Health. Vol. 22 (1) Spring 2004, pp. 47-51. Educational Publishing
Foundation.
Anderson, Frances Sommer. “Trauma, Dissociation, and Conflict: The Space Where Neuroscience,
Cognitive Science, and Psychoanalysis Overlap”. Psychoanalytic Psychology. Vol. 20 (3) Summer
2003, pp. 536-541. Educational Publishing Foundation.
Altmann, Erik M. “Reconstructing the serial order of events: a case study of September 11, 2001”.
Applied Cognitive Psychology; Dec2003, Vol. 17 Issue 9, p1067, 14p, 2 charts, 4 graphs, 1 c.
Talarico, Jennifer M. & David C. Rubin. “Confidence, not consistency, characterizes flashbulb
memories”. Psychological Science; Sep2003, Vol. 14 Issue 5, p455, 7p.
Smith, Marilyn C., Uri Bibi, & D. Erin Sheard. “Evidence for the differential impact of time and
emotion on personal and event memories for September 11, 2001”. Applied Cognitive Psychology;
Dec2003, Vol. 17 Issue 9, p1047, 9p, 2 charts.
Serani, Deborah. “Expanding the frame; Psychoanalysis after September 11.” Bulletin of the
Menninger Clinic; Winter2004, Vol. 68 Issue 1, p1, 8p.
Images provided by:
Google.com Image Search
the.honoluluadvertiser.com/. ../12/flagpole_b.jpg
www.unhp.org/crg/ indy-maps-statenzip.html
www.unhp.org/crg/ indy-maps-manhatzip.html
openalbum.barmen.ch/ album.cfm?ID=146