Autobiographical memory serves three basic functions of self-continuity, social bonding, and directing behavior. Although previous research has analyzed functional remembering across cultures and emotional valence, little is known about their interactive dynamics. We coded functions of positive and negative work-related autobiographical memories of working adults from Singapore, Turkey, and the U.S. The results revealed an interaction between culture and memory type, whereby memories by Turkish participants were more likely to serve the self function, particularly in positive memories. Across cultures, positive memories scored higher on the social function than did negative memories. Memories by Turkish employees were the most, and Singaporean employees were the least likely to serve a social function. In contrast, narratives by both Singaporean and Turkish employees scored higher on the directive function than did narratives by American employees. The results are discussed in light of cultural differences in autobiographical memory usage as well as workplace relational norms.

In honor cultures, maintaining a positive moral reputation (e.g., being known as an honest person) is highly important, whereas in dignity cultures, self-respect (e.g., competence and success) is strongly emphasized. Depending on their cultural background, people respond differently to threats to these two dimensions of honor. In two studies, we examined the effects of morality-focused and competence-focused threats on people’s goal pursuit in two honor cultures (Turkey, Southern United States, and Latinx) and in a dignity culture (Northern United States). In Study 1, Turkish participants were more likely to reject a highly qualified person as a partner in a future task if that person threatened their morality (vs. no-threat), even though this meant letting go of the goal of winning an award. Participants from the U.S. honor and dignity groups, however, were equally likely to choose the people who gave them threatening and neutral feedback. In Study 2, Turkish and U.S. honor participants were more likely to persist in a subsequent goal after receiving a morality threat (vs. no-threat), whereas U.S. dignity participants were more likely to persist in a subsequent goal after receiving a competence threat (vs. no-threat). These results show that people’s responses to honor threats are influenced by the dominant values of their culture and by the tools that are available to them to potentially restore their reputation (e.g., punishing the offender vs. working hard on a different task). This research can have implications for multicultural contexts in which people can have conflicting goals such as diverse work environments.