The ‘sites of oblivion’: How not to remember in a world of reminders

IF 1.4 2区 心理学 Q1 CULTURAL STUDIES
V. Nourkova, A. Gofman
{"title":"The ‘sites of oblivion’: How not to remember in a world of reminders","authors":"V. Nourkova, A. Gofman","doi":"10.1177/17506980231176039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While it is commonly accepted that forgetting may serve to accomplish worthwhile goals, relevant social technologies require detailed analysis. We examined the literature on the social practices of the collective inhibition of unwanted memories. Complimenting the term ‘sites of memory’ introduced by Nora, we applied the term ‘sites of oblivion’ to the areas intentionally designed to protect visitors from specific unwanted memories associated with the disturbing affect. This study proposed a preliminary classification of the ‘sites of oblivion’. This analysis identified four qualitatively distinct social politics aimed at evoking the transformation of existing sites of memory into memory-inhibiting areas. Each of these politics employs a specific psychological mechanism of memory inhibition and varies with concrete strategies to achieve the goal of not remembering. These basic high-level forgetting politics include: exploiting the natural fragility of human activity traces or destroying memorial sites, including various forms of ignoring (the ‘no traces’ politic); retracting attention from memory triggers to other intense stimuli (the ‘switching memory to’ politic); recasting ‘sites of memory’ into ‘sites of oblivion’ through functional replacement or reconceptualisation, including renaming (the ‘recasting’ politic); and the politic of ‘hyper-evocation’, that is, decreasing the probability of recall outside of memorial sites by rising the threshold of mnemonic response to those reminders that are weaker than hyper-reminders. The psychological mechanisms underlying the inhibitory mnemonic effect of ‘sites of oblivion’ are as follows: Pavlovian extinction, attention deployment, Pavlovian re-conditioning and Pavlovian discrimination, respectively.","PeriodicalId":47104,"journal":{"name":"Memory Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980231176039","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While it is commonly accepted that forgetting may serve to accomplish worthwhile goals, relevant social technologies require detailed analysis. We examined the literature on the social practices of the collective inhibition of unwanted memories. Complimenting the term ‘sites of memory’ introduced by Nora, we applied the term ‘sites of oblivion’ to the areas intentionally designed to protect visitors from specific unwanted memories associated with the disturbing affect. This study proposed a preliminary classification of the ‘sites of oblivion’. This analysis identified four qualitatively distinct social politics aimed at evoking the transformation of existing sites of memory into memory-inhibiting areas. Each of these politics employs a specific psychological mechanism of memory inhibition and varies with concrete strategies to achieve the goal of not remembering. These basic high-level forgetting politics include: exploiting the natural fragility of human activity traces or destroying memorial sites, including various forms of ignoring (the ‘no traces’ politic); retracting attention from memory triggers to other intense stimuli (the ‘switching memory to’ politic); recasting ‘sites of memory’ into ‘sites of oblivion’ through functional replacement or reconceptualisation, including renaming (the ‘recasting’ politic); and the politic of ‘hyper-evocation’, that is, decreasing the probability of recall outside of memorial sites by rising the threshold of mnemonic response to those reminders that are weaker than hyper-reminders. The psychological mechanisms underlying the inhibitory mnemonic effect of ‘sites of oblivion’ are as follows: Pavlovian extinction, attention deployment, Pavlovian re-conditioning and Pavlovian discrimination, respectively.
“遗忘之地”:在一个充满提醒的世界里,如何不去记忆
虽然人们普遍认为遗忘可能有助于实现有价值的目标,但相关的社会技术需要详细的分析。我们研究了关于集体抑制不想要的记忆的社会实践的文献。为了赞扬Nora引入的“记忆位点”一词,我们将“遗忘位点”一术语应用于故意设计的区域,以保护游客免受与令人不安的影响相关的特定不想要的记忆的影响。这项研究提出了“遗忘地点”的初步分类。这项分析确定了四种性质不同的社会政治,旨在唤起现有记忆部位向记忆抑制区域的转变。每一种政治都采用了一种特定的记忆抑制心理机制,并随着具体策略的不同而变化,以达到不记忆的目的。这些基本的高层遗忘政治包括:利用人类活动痕迹的自然脆弱性或破坏纪念场所,包括各种形式的忽视(“无痕迹”政治);将注意力从记忆触发器撤回到其他强烈刺激(将记忆切换到策略);通过功能替换或重新概念化,包括重命名,将“记忆位点”重塑为“遗忘位点”(“重塑”策略);以及“超唤起”策略,即通过提高对那些比超提醒弱的提醒的记忆反应阈值,降低在纪念馆外回忆的概率。“遗忘位点”抑制记忆效应的心理机制分别为:巴甫洛夫灭绝、注意力部署、巴甫洛夫再条件反射和巴甫洛夫辨别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Memory Studies
Memory Studies Multiple-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.20%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Memory Studies is an international peer reviewed journal. Memory Studies affords recognition, form, and direction to work in this nascent field, and provides a critical forum for dialogue and debate on the theoretical, empirical, and methodological issues central to a collaborative understanding of memory today. Memory Studies examines the social, cultural, cognitive, political and technological shifts affecting how, what and why individuals, groups and societies remember, and forget. The journal responds to and seeks to shape public and academic discourse on the nature, manipulation, and contestation of memory in the contemporary era.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信