Memories shared and unshared in everyday conversation Tia G. B. Hansen & P. Svante Eriksen Aalborg University, Denmark Autobiographical memory function has attracted increased interest over the last decade It is generally agreed that memories serve both self-, social and directive uses, and empirical methods for studying the issue in more detail are being developed (e.g., Hyman & Faries, 1992; Bluck et al., 2005). However, a diverse set of naturally occurring memories may be difficult to achieve by retrospective methods, thus, in the Functions of Everyday Memories (FEM) study, we adapted a diary method to achieve such a set. Introduction Aim The goal of the FEM study in general is to explore use of naturally occurring memories, including those so mundane that they may be forgotten when queried retrospectively only. The present analysis concerns the subset of 339 memories that occurred during conversations. We ask: 1. What distinguishes memories that one chooses to share, from those one does not, in terms of mood and emotion? 2. Does this vary by gender? Method Design: Explorative diary study, using a 2-phased procedure (immediate notes, questionnaire later) adapted from Berntsen (1996). Participants: A convenience sample of 55 men and 55 women, age (M=25) years, reported 990 naturally occurring memories, of which 339 occurred during conversations. Materials and procedure: For three days, participants carried a leaflet in which they took a few immediate notes when a memory occurred (max 3 memories a day). When sampling was completed, they received a questionnaire for each memory and used their notes as self-prompts to recall the memory and context of remembering. Questions included whether rembering took place during conversation and if so whether the memory was shared with the interlocutor, how their mood had been before remembering (0=never felt worse to 6=never felt better), and whether the mood subsequently changed (for the better, no change, or for the worse). The remembered event’s emotional intensity and valence were also rated (both 0=lowest to 6=highest). Analysis software: Decision tree analyses are carried out using the package rpart, which is an add-on to R, an open source programming language and environment for statistical computing and graphics (available from ) Presented at 7 th Biennial Congress of the Society for Applied Research on Memory and Cognition (SARMAC VII), Lewiston, Maine, July 25-29, 2007 Conclusions References Berntsen, D. (1996). Involuntary autobiographical memories. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10(5), Bluck, S., Alea, N., Habermas, T., & Rubin, D. (2005). A TALE of three functions: The self-reported use of autobiographical memory. Social Cognition, 23(11), Hyman, I. E. & Faries, J. M. (1992). The functions of autobiographical memory. In M. A. Conway et al. (Eds.), Theoretical perspectives on autobiographical memory (pp ). Dordrecht: Kluwer. We are grateful to Lea S. Treebak, Sara Lundhus, Jeanette R. Henriksen, Christine Vallentin & Lene Finnerup for help with a previous part of this study. The Obel Foundation for travel grant # B 1. Results By gender: Prior mood The memory’s emotional intensity valence Mood change Memories are particularly likely to be shared when in a positive mood the memory is not very intense the memory is positive? For mood increasing or sustaining, shared memories predominate over unshared, but not for mood decreasing. For men, when to share forms a reasonably simple pattern: If the memory is not very intense, share it. If it is intense, probability of sharing depends on prior mood. For women, the pattern is less obvious. Best predictor is prior mood above medium, in which case women will share about 70% of the applicable memories. In-conversation memories were more frequently reported by women (42% of 495 memories) than by men (35%). However, those that did arise during conversation, men were as likely (69%) as women (62%) to share. Men reported more frequent mood increase (38%) after remembering than women (25%) (chi2(2)=7.9, p<.05). No main gender difference was found for prior mood, memory emotional intensity, or memory valence. However, determinants of sharing (or not) seem to differ slightly, as shown by the decision trees. Memories are most likely to be shared when in a good mood. (Prior mood of shared M=3.8 vs unshared M=3.4, t(336)=3.87, p<.001) High-intense memories are less likely to be shared. (Intensity of shared M=3.0 vs unshared M=3.5; t(337)=2.89, p<.01) Positive memories seem particularly prone to be shared. (However, valence of shared M=3.7 vs unshared M=3.5; ns). Shared memories predominate when the mood is increased or unchanged after remembering. When mood is decrased after remembering, the memory was as often unshared as shared. Given low emotional intensity (xx or less) of a memory, men will share it (90% of cases). If its emotional intensity is medium or high, prior mood determines whether the tendency to share it is only fifty-fifty (when prior mood is bad) or two out of three (when prior mood is good). Women’s pattern of sharing is less clear. The best determinant is prior mood: If it is good or neutral, 70% of memories are shared. If prior mood is bad, negative memories seem to be shared as often; for other memories, a combination of intensity and valence decides the propensity to share.