What would give you stronger and more acurate memory, first, second, or third person views on a situation?

Question

Who would have a more acurate memory of what took place in a fight if one person was involved in the fight, one stopped the fight, and one heard the fight?

Answer 1

All could remember an event equally well, however, the memory of it would be from their individual perspective, which is influenced by many factors.  What was the intention of the person in that particular context?  What was his or her line of vision of the event, or even their visual acuity?  What's the relationship to the people involved in the experience: participant, observer, passerby?  Age, background, education, economic status, religion, gender, etc. all affect the way we interpret and remember what we see, hear, experience.

Answer 2

first person assuming you didnt get knocked the h**l out

Answer 3

Memories and lessons learned:

Although one's adrenaline might distort one's memory, I believe the participant would enact a chosen strategy and best recall how and at what point that strategy worked or failed.  His own bruises and fractures might also be poignant reminders.  My last fight (Golden Gloves, 58 yrs ago) involved my shoulder being dislocated.  My memory is still vivid, aided by residual aches and pains.  My lesson:  I should have chosen the violin, or gone to a movie, or read a book or ...........