Search

How do groups remember their shared past? Are there individual differences within a group? How easy is it to change collective memories? The present article addresses these questions by focusing on differences within national subgroups, exploring how national collective memories might differ for Black and White Americans, how individual differences and external influences might moderate or alter any differences, and the temporal extent of any changes that might occur due to external influences. Across four studies, participants were asked to identify the five "most important" events in U.S. history and then asked about their political ideology and racial and national identification, though not in every study. Although individual differences emerged, Black and White participants differed in the types of events they identified as important in U.S. history, with Black participants identifying more race-relevant events than White participants and White participants identifying more traditional founding events than Black participants. As to changes in collective memory, in response to a minimal identity salience manipulation, the murder of George Floyd, and July 4th celebrations, national collective memories evidenced malleability only after the murder of George Floyd. In this instance, the mention of race-relevant events increased, even as the frequency of mention of traditional founding events remained stable. The observed increase in race-relevant events was temporary, however. Findings are discussed in relation to contemporary discussions on collective memory, especially with respect to group differences, individual differences within groups, and mnemonic inertia. Public Significance Statement: Public discourse about the way U.S. history should be told, especially how it should incorporate the Black experience, often pays little attention to the collective memory Black and White Americans actually hold. The present study underscores differences in the ways Black and White participants remember U.S. history but also explores how these differences depend not just on race but also on how Black and White participants navigate what are often competing identities of being Black, White, or simply American. Whatever their content, presently held collective memories proved relatively resistant to change. In the present study, we found that emotionally charged events such as the murder of George Floyd elicited change, but the change proved temporary. The way American history is presently remembered and the stability of these representations needs to be acknowledged as the public considers what might be a better reckoning of the U.S. past. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does the act of remembering or not remembering convey socially relevant information? The present work explored this question by examining the role flashbulb memories (FBMs) and memories for personal (MPEs) events play in social categorization and social identification. Study 1 investigated the extent to which Americans believe FBMs of both domestic and international public events and memories for life-script events should be remembered by an American or a Briton. Study 2 built on Study 1 and examined whether these normative expectations serve as a basis for identifying someone as "American," "American immigrant," "Black American," "female," "religious," or "politically conservative." Results indicate that FBMs and MPEs affect social categorization and identification in distinctive ways. The role of FBMs as markers of social identity is discussed. General Audience Summary: People will often remember the circumstances in which they learned of a public, emotionally charged event. Often referred to as flashbulb memories (FBMs), they are of intense interest to the general public, as well as the psychological community, with commentators often noting that an event is such that people will never forget where they learned of it. Since Brown and Kulik's pioneering article on FBMs, psychologists have intensively explored the conditions under which these memories are formed, their accuracy, and their phenomenological features. Less studied are the social functions of FBMs. As Brown and Kulik noted, and have been amply demonstrated since then, FBMs are community-specific and widely held within the affected community. Black Americans, for instance, tend to have FBMs of learning of the assassination of Malcolm X, whereas White Americans do not. The present article explores the possibility that FBMs' community-specificity and widespread nature within an affected community may allow them to serve as markers of community membership. A person, for instance, might not be viewed as a "good" American if they do not have a FBM of the attack of September 11, 2001. The present article explores this possibility by first investigating the extent to which Americans believe FBMs of both domestic and international public events and memories for life-script events should be remembered by an American or a Briton. It then examines whether these normative expectations serve as a basis for social categorization. Results indicate that FBMs and MPEs affect social categorization and identification in distinctive ways. People may find FBMs of interest, in part, because of their function as markers of social identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present studies examine how people recall history. Sometimes, certain national histories are well known and sometimes they are not. We propose that, under certain circumstances, culturally distinctive representations of typical national histories can be used to guide recall, particularly in cases where the history is not well known. We focus on three national samples with varied levels of knowledge about each history: Great Britain, India, and the United States. In Study 1, we establish typical historical event templates for each nation consisting of events that a large proportion of participants from each sample identify as important in a typical nation's history. We examine points of divergence between the different groups' typical event templates and the valences of these events. In Study 2, we test and find that, in conditions of less knowledge, participants tend to refer to particular historical events that coincide with events unique to their own group's typical history. In Study 3, we demonstrate that this effect can be found even when a group possesses a reasonable amount of knowledge about the target country. We conclude by discussing the implications in relation to how such a retrieval strategy might inform interpretations of events in the present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]