Sharing specific “We” autobiographical memories in close relationships: the role of contact frequency

ABSTRACT

Sharing memories in conversations with close others is posited to be part of the social function of autobiographical memory. The present research focused on the sharing of a particular type of memory: Specific memories about one-time co-experienced events, which we termed Specific We memories. Two studies with 595 total participants examined the factors that lead to and/or are influenced by the sharing of Specific We memories. In Study 1, participants reported on their most recent conversation. Specific We memories were reportedly discussed most often in conversations with others who were close and with whom the participant had frequent communication. In Study 2, participants were randomly assigned either to increase or to simply record the frequency of communication with a close other (parent). Increases in the frequency of reported sharing of Specific We memories as well as closeness to the parent resulted. Mediation analyses of both studies revealed causal relationships among reported sharing of Specific We memories and closeness. We discuss the relevance of these results for understanding the social function of autobiographical memory.

KEYWORDS:

• Autobiographical memory
• interpersonal relationships
• conversations

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Sixty-one of the 71 participants were screened out for the same reason: On an item instructing them to select “strongly disagree” from a list of options, they instead chose “strongly agree”. Thus the vast majority of excluded participants made a minor perceptual error on this single item. Nevertheless, that response does indicate a failure of full attention, so we did not include their data in the analyses presented. The patterns and significance levels of the results do not change if these 61 participants are included.

2. We were unconcerned about the low reliability of this five-item measure, as we assumed it would have a zero-sum quality (i.e., participants who emailed frequently probably texted less frequently and vice versa). We were uninterested in differences across various modes of communication. Readers interested in such differences should contact the first author for the data.