How reliable is our memory under stress conditions?
The topic of memory, just like many other Psychology topics, is subjected to a lot of misconceptions and myths. The way we collect, store and recall memories is extremely complex with different factors like emotional activation or information type playing an important role.
There is considerable scientific evidence that proves that information with emotional content is remembered more vividly than neutral information. This happens not only with autobiographical memories — important events in our lives- but also with information provided in a lab in the course of an experiment.
Emotional information is remembered more accurately because of two special features that make its initial encoding more effective; valence and arousal. Emotional information, as opposed to neutral one, is evaluated by us as either positive or negative (valence). It also provides some type of physiological and psychological activation; having a soothing or agitating effect on us (arousal). Information is more effectively encoded when processed in this context of activation and interpretation as it helps us to combine new information with already existing memories.
If emotionally charged memories seem to be remembered better than neutral ones, why are people so unreliable when retelling an emotional story?
Even though emotional events are generally remembered better than neutral ones, very intense emotional activation can make people forget details. Intense activation leads to attention narrowing which makes us focus on the central aspects of an event, ignoring the secondary details.
The Yerkes–Dodson curve; a classic, empirical law that dictates that performance increases with physiological or mental arousal, but only up to a point, can explain the difference in accuracy of memories on subjects under stress. When a certain point of activation is reached, performance decreases.

