攻破美国国会大厦:记忆与道德判断。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Ryan T Daley, Minjae J Kim, Liane Young, Elizabeth A Kensinger
{"title":"攻破美国国会大厦:记忆与道德判断。","authors":"Ryan T Daley, Minjae J Kim, Liane Young, Elizabeth A Kensinger","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2025.2544074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Collective memories play important social roles for individuals within society. Although other types of memory content (e.g. autobiographical and associative memory) appear to guide decision-making in social and moral contexts, it is unclear how or whether collective memories are associated with third-person moral evaluations. Also, updating third-person moral evaluations can be impacted by broader narrative contexts. The primary goal of the present study was to determine whether particular collective memory details (described here as prioritised details) associated with a specific event (i.e. the breaching of the U.S. Capitol building) or other related collective memories (described here as general event memories), are associated with evaluations of groups of U.S. Senators, based on whether they followed their intended voting behaviour, or changed their voting behaviour following the breaching. Liberal participants' prioritised memories included more details overall than conservatives', and the more details liberals retrieved, the more they differentiated evaluations of the Senator groups. Liberals and conservatives showed a positive correlation between prioritised memory details and the number of general event memories retrieved, but general event memories were not associated with subsequent evaluations of Senators. These findings point to a role for specific details from collective memories in third-person evaluations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Breaching of the U.S. Capitol: memory and moral judgment.\",\"authors\":\"Ryan T Daley, Minjae J Kim, Liane Young, Elizabeth A Kensinger\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02699931.2025.2544074\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Collective memories play important social roles for individuals within society. Although other types of memory content (e.g. autobiographical and associative memory) appear to guide decision-making in social and moral contexts, it is unclear how or whether collective memories are associated with third-person moral evaluations. Also, updating third-person moral evaluations can be impacted by broader narrative contexts. The primary goal of the present study was to determine whether particular collective memory details (described here as prioritised details) associated with a specific event (i.e. the breaching of the U.S. Capitol building) or other related collective memories (described here as general event memories), are associated with evaluations of groups of U.S. Senators, based on whether they followed their intended voting behaviour, or changed their voting behaviour following the breaching. Liberal participants' prioritised memories included more details overall than conservatives', and the more details liberals retrieved, the more they differentiated evaluations of the Senator groups. Liberals and conservatives showed a positive correlation between prioritised memory details and the number of general event memories retrieved, but general event memories were not associated with subsequent evaluations of Senators. These findings point to a role for specific details from collective memories in third-person evaluations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48412,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognition & Emotion\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognition & Emotion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2025.2544074\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2025.2544074","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

集体记忆在社会中对个人起着重要的社会作用。尽管其他类型的记忆内容(如自传体记忆和联想记忆)似乎在社会和道德背景下指导决策,但集体记忆如何或是否与第三人称道德评价相关联尚不清楚。此外,更新第三人称道德评价可能会受到更广泛的叙事背景的影响。本研究的主要目标是确定与特定事件(即破坏美国国会大厦)或其他相关集体记忆(此处称为一般事件记忆)相关的特定集体记忆细节(此处称为优先细节)是否与美国参议员群体的评估相关,基于他们是否遵循他们的预期投票行为,或在破坏后改变他们的投票行为。自由派参与者的优先记忆总体上比保守派参与者包含更多的细节,而且自由派回忆的细节越多,他们对参议员小组的不同评价就越大。自由派和保守派在优先记忆细节和检索的一般事件记忆数量之间显示出正相关,但一般事件记忆与参议员的后续评估没有关联。这些发现指出了集体记忆中的具体细节在第三人称评价中的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Breaching of the U.S. Capitol: memory and moral judgment.

Collective memories play important social roles for individuals within society. Although other types of memory content (e.g. autobiographical and associative memory) appear to guide decision-making in social and moral contexts, it is unclear how or whether collective memories are associated with third-person moral evaluations. Also, updating third-person moral evaluations can be impacted by broader narrative contexts. The primary goal of the present study was to determine whether particular collective memory details (described here as prioritised details) associated with a specific event (i.e. the breaching of the U.S. Capitol building) or other related collective memories (described here as general event memories), are associated with evaluations of groups of U.S. Senators, based on whether they followed their intended voting behaviour, or changed their voting behaviour following the breaching. Liberal participants' prioritised memories included more details overall than conservatives', and the more details liberals retrieved, the more they differentiated evaluations of the Senator groups. Liberals and conservatives showed a positive correlation between prioritised memory details and the number of general event memories retrieved, but general event memories were not associated with subsequent evaluations of Senators. These findings point to a role for specific details from collective memories in third-person evaluations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信