Collective memories and present-day intergroup relations: Introduction to the Special Thematic Section

Abstract

This special thematic section aims to bring together current research on the connections between collective memories -or representations of history -and present-day intergroup relations. Drawing from a multitude of geographical and historical contexts as well as different methodologies, we bring forth ten articles focusing on distinct aspects of the relations between representations of the past and present day intergroup dynamics. The topics covered in these articles focus on one or more of the four research lines identified within this field: 1) the antecedents of collective memories; 2) the contents and structure of collective memories; 3) the official or institutional transmission of collective memories; and 4) distinct socio-psychological correlates of collective memories in present-day societies. Together, the contributions in this special thematic section showcase current directions of research within the field and highlight the need to consider the role of representations of the past for understanding present day instances of intergroup conflict or harmony. We discuss the need for more interdisciplinary work in this field, as well as more applied research in the future.Keywords: collective memories, representations of history, intergroup relations, conflict, collective forgetting, group-based emotions Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2017, Vol. 5(2), 694-706, doi:10.5964/jspp.v5i2.895 Published (VoR): 2018-02-05.Handling Editor: Johanna Ray Vollhardt, Department of Psychology, Clark University, Worcester, MA, USA *Corresponding author at: Public Policy Research Center, Universidad Mayor, Chile, Campus Alonso de Córdova, Avenida Alonso de Córdova 5495 Dept. 1405, Las Condes, Santiago de Chile, Chile. E-mail: figueiredo.anacm@gmail.com This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.History is regularly mobilized by politicians, activists or the media to justify, contextualize, or legitimize ideological claims, proposals for a course of action, or political and societal standpoints. This mobilization of history is nevertheless selective: depending on their specific aims, people will choose particular historical events, moments or figures to strengthen their arguments or champion their goals. Interestingly, the very same event or "chapter" of the past may be used by different political actors, to achieve quite different aims: Past wrongdoing can be framed as "historical responsibility" that needs to be remembered or as a stain on the country's image that should be Journal of Social and Political Psychology jspp.psychopen.eu | 2195-3325 forgotten. Thus, remembering the past cannot be conceived of as an objective recollection of historical events, without consideration of the affective, cognitive and behavioral aspects that influence such recollection.According to t...

The nation in context: How intergroup relations shape the discursive construction of identity continuity and discontinuity

“…Without the constraints of relevant others and our perceptions of them, we would not have representations of the past that were stigmatizing, nor experience our identities as such. Yet, it is precisely because intergroup relations are intertwined that these dynamics exist and become consequential for intra‐group processes (i.e., Figueiredo et al ., 2017). Thus, while the nation might be seen as less agentic and in control in the past (i.e., Topcu & Hirst, 2019), it is the ability to claim control over the historical narrative and the choices of action in the present that allow for a desirable national future to be imagined.…”

“…In acknowledging the role of valence for whether continuity has a positive or negative impact on identity, we must also acknowledge that this valence is not defined in isolation from relevant others. National histories are typically embedded in international contexts, and those who hold the power to shape how events are remembered can also shape how we position ourselves in relation to the past (see also Figueiredo, Martinovic, Rees, & Licata, 2017). For example, in a study on representations of world history in 12 countries, participants rated Eurocentric events as more important than ethnocentric events, even in non‐European countries (Liu et al ., 2005).…”

(Im)moral Symbols and (Im)moral Deeds: Defensive Strategies for Coping with Historical Transgressions of Group Heroes and Villains

“…The metaphor of Vuk was later used as a symbol to divert group members from converting to Islam, which was deemed an act of treason ( -Deri c, 2005). Taking a social-representations approach to history, we can sketch out two broad functions that heroes and villains have concerning social identities (see Figueiredo et al, 2017;Hanke et al, 2015). First, they can be descriptive in the sense that they provide the content of social identities: "Who we are (not)."…”

Collective memories of political violence of health-care providers in Ayacucho, Perú

“…Members of a collectivity evoke certain past events based upon a consensus they have reached by means of shared and legitimated social codes at a specific time in history (Dobles, 2009;Halbwachs 1950Halbwachs /1992Jelin, 2002;Ricoeur, 1999). Furthermore, the evocation of history depends on the political aims and interests of the involved actors (Figueiredo, Martinovic, Rees, & Licata, 2018).…”