Emphatic Memories and Their Meaning in Societal and Legal Contexts: A Narrative Review and Position Paper

Memory is not a purely personal issue of recalling contents from the past. Memory also has implications for interpersonal and societal interaction. Hereby, especially “emphatic memories” play an important role, but their potential side effects are often neglected. This narrative review and position paper gives a short introduction to the phenomenon of emphatic memories and implications for counteracting dysfunctional effects of emphatic memories.

Memory is mostly understood as a recall of earlier events. But memory is more than just remembering [1]. Memory depends on what is stored in memory, when something is remembered, and in which individual state something is remembered. These aspects are different parts of a complex psychological process, closely related to emotions and motifs [2, 3]. Nobody remembers everything from his life but only selectively “important” events. Furthermore, remembering is a particular operation of a cognitive system that permits the flexible recombination of different components of encoded traces into representations of possible past events [1]. Memories can also be induced or construed [4]. False memories are reports of events that have never taken place. False memories may develop if a person gets to know reports about past events, especially when these reports appear emotionally touching, or somehow “important.” Even strong wishes that something should have happened may result in memories about events that have not happened [5]. Memories also change when people talk about the past. Neurologist Oliver Sacks [6] describes that he precisely remembered how bombs fell on his parents’ home in London. An uncle corrected him as he had been in Scotland at the time. Family stories had induced a “memory.” It surprised him that he was still remembering what had happened, even when he knew it was a mistake. How little objective memories are has also been extensively studied in forensic psychology. Parties in legal battles or defendants almost never tell the “truth” but remember and report in fullest conviction what suits their motivation. These are not “lies” but “pseudologias.” These are very logically stated argumentations, presented with the best knowledge and conscience [5, 7]. This is called “state-dependent memory” [8, 9]. In summary, the memory is no archive in which experiences and events are stored and retrieved, but very flexible, inventive, and changing in accordance with the present psychological status of a person, and less the real past [10].

Memories are not only stored and retrieved, depending on situational triggers, but they are also associated with feelings. Revoking a shameful event will be accompanied with feelings of shame. If one tries to suppress such memories to avoid unpleasant emotions, then it can lead to intrusions, as is known from “post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD” [11]. This causes that memories impose themselves again and again, even and especially when they are painful. Spontaneous memories and accompanying unpleasant emotions are particularly frequent, if a process is not completed, which has been described as Zeigarnik effect [12]. This can be found, for example, in persons with “post-traumatic embitterment disorder” (PTED) [13‒18]. Such persons have to think back almost compulsively again and again because they have experienced injustice but not found a compensation. PTSD and PTED can be understood as “memory impairment.” If those affected could forget and detach themselves from the past, then they would be better off.

So far, we were talking about memories in the sense of remembering or knowing. A different type of memories are emphatic reproachful memories in the sense of reminding. The two types of memories must not be confused with each other. It is one thing to know the wedding day and a totally different one to be reminded of the wedding day. Due to their nature, such emphatic memories always have a purpose (remind somebody of something, or intentionally ignoring somebody [19]). There is the one who reminds and the one who is reminded. There are the ones who remind each other of their group identity and the others who are thereby excluded. Emphatic memories are an interaction between persons. The goal of emphatic memories can be to make somebody act in a wanted way, to justify oneself, to justify own claims, to distinguish, to praise oneself, or to attack somebody, as seen in patients with PTED [17, 20]. Many relationships are destroyed by reproachful memories, when partners keep reminding the other one of what they themselves have done good and the other bad. It can be especially aggressive and degrading when emphatic memories are linked to the “generous” claim that one wants to forgive what happened but will never forget.

Emphatic memories are not only an individual but also social phenomenon. Reminding of historical events can also create a personal identity. This applies to achievements of ancestors or experiences of one’s own social group in the past. Memories of historical events create solidarity with one’s own subgroup, for example, people who suffered centuries ago from colonial exploitation, or immigrated from certain foreign countries. Such memories define groups and lead to a differentiation from others. This self-chosen memory-based “seclusion” (separating oneself from others) provokes a reactive “exclusion” (excluding someone). Memory-based social profiling and identitarian self-attribution of population are prone to cause conflicts [21, 22]. They are often used to stir up conflicts and to achieve political goals. Political memories are an important field of political action [10]. And here again false memories play a role. An example may be that France commemorates the French Revolution of 1789 every year on July 14 with holidays and military parades, to distinguish France as a birthplace of democracy and “freedom, equality, and fraternity.” Historically, the French revolution meant that king and queen were beheaded, followed by a dictatorial and extremely bloodthirsty regime, followed by an emperor, who was responsible for the first European war, followed by many more kings. Nothing of this has anything to do with freedom, equality, and fraternity but would rather be a reason for a mourning remembrance. The historical reality obviously does not hinder a pseudological remembrance with nationalist celebrations. The example shows that social memories [23], as with individuals, arise less from reality than from motives [24]. Political memories can be downright dangerous. There are many examples of how “memories” of a thousand, five hundred, or 50 years ago currently justify armed conflicts and territorial claims. Similarly, political monuments and commemorative events can be critical. The German city of Dresden was destroyed several times by Berlin troops. This is known by educated people and no longer a problem because it is not talked about as an enduring problem. But it would become a problem, if someone came up with the idea of commemorating this with annual processions of light. Political monuments regularly provoke either memories of self-grandness or degradation of others. Monuments can therefore be understood as aggressive acts that can trigger reactance, bitterness, feelings of revenge, and counter-aggression. If political powers change, memories are changed, and monuments or historical documents are demolished (e.g., [25] damnatio memoriae).

Constant remembrance keeps topics hot and preserves conflicts with continuing suffering for both sides and preventing reconciliation. This can lead to persistent bitterness with a desire for revenge [26]. This is possible even transgenerationally, as the example of blood revenge proves. An unbiased encounter between children and grandchildren of former conflict parties is made almost impossible by memories of the conflicts of their ancestors. There are enemies even if they themselves have nothing to do with what happened decades before they were born. Social bitterness and the desire for revenge therefore do not need a personal experience; it is sufficient to “remember” historical events.

Although on an individual and social level the problems and dangers of emphatic memories are evident, it is repeatedly argued that memory helps to cope with what has happened, leads to peace, and prevents a repetition of history, whereas forgetting is a suppression of memories, which trivializes historical atrocities and results in a repetition. The individual and social evidence clearly speaks for the opposite. Memories can cause the repetition of events, as is demonstrated by many wars, which are justified by memories [27].

Not revoking memories and even forgetting is a way to come to peace in individuals, social encounters, and societal conflicts. The problem is that functional processes of active forgetting by cognitive control [28] do not work in all cases. As is known from intrusions in trauma patients, the attempt to actively avoid emotional unwanted memories can rather lead to their increase. Dysfunctional “suppression” of memories by avoidance of potential triggers binds a lot of energy. Memories can however fade gradually if they are not refreshed with negative emotional associations and if memories of past events are freed of emotions [29]. A first step is to remember without negative emotions. This can be achieved by “narrative reinterpretation” [30]. Since memories do not reflect the truth, but must be understood as motive-driven storytelling, motives and content of memory stories can be changed. This is the core of every psychotherapeutic trauma treatment. Talking with patients about the past results in a new interpretation of events and thus a change of memories and associated emotions [31].

Another approach is recommended by “gratitude psychotherapy” [32, 33]. People are asked to remember explicitly how lucky they have been to get what they have or to be spared many other mischiefs.

Of particular importance in overcoming pathogenic memories is “forgiveness,” which means to let the past come to a rest. Forgiveness involves willfully putting aside feelings of resentment toward someone who has committed a wrong, been unfair or hurtful, or otherwise harmed a person. Forgiveness is not merely accepting what happened or ceasing to be angry. Rather, it involves a voluntary transformation of the forgiving person’s feelings, attitudes, and behavior, so that s/he is no longer dominated by resentment and can express compassion, generosity, or the like toward the person who wronged him/her [34]. A distinction is made between self-forgiveness (intrapersonal) and interpersonal or social forgiveness (interpersonal). There is a cognitive and an emotional part of forgiveness [35‒39]. Forgiveness does not require that the culprit acknowledges his wrongdoing, apologizes, or shows remorse. One can forgive people who are no longer alive, as well as people who are not willing or able to understand their guilt. Forgiveness must not be mistaken for justification, condoning, pardoning, reconciliation, tolerating, ignoring, relativizing negative events. Interpersonal emotional forgiveness plays a key role in the maintenance of social relationships, avoidance of unnecessary conflict, and the ability to move forward with one’s life and support forgetting past issues [40‒42]. Intrapersonal forgiveness means to forgive oneself concerning own earlier decisions or actions, which cannot be redone or corrected, and instead move forward with one’s life without continued anger toward oneself. Forgiveness is a form of coming to terms with the past and to learn to cope with injuries and the emotional pain arising from the past. This allows the affected person to gain self-efficacy by leaving victimhood and regaining control [43‒45]. Forgiveness is an active process as described in “forgiveness therapy” [46‒49]. The negative past is described and accepted without relativization. The full spectrum of accompanying emotions is recognized. The consequences of forgiveness and non-forgiveness are clarified. The person concerned must then decide that he wants to forgive and reframe the past, look forward to the future. It has been empirically shown that forgiveness helps to reduce depression and anxiety, as well as negative affect in general, and to promote positive affect, reduces feelings of stress, increases self-esteem, improves life satisfaction and reconciliation with the “perpetrator,” and enables a greater number of functioning relationships and thus better social inclusion [50‒53].

The ability to forgive is part of the wisdom skills [54‒56]. Subdimensions of wisdom are the ability to see facts as they are, to know problem-solving strategies, to acknowledge the temporal and situational embedding of problems, to accept the diversity of values, to understand the views and emotions of other persons, to be modest, to understand the impression one makes on other person, to recognize, tolerate, and manage emotions, to live with uncertainty, to act under a long-term perspective, and finally to turn away from the past and forgive, if necessary. Wise persons are able to let the past alone, are less resentful, can use negative experiences in a functional manner for the future, are more relaxed.

Negative events, which are unforgettable and result in intrusions and emphatic memories, are not so much dangerous and life-threatening incidents, as described in the context of PTSD, but rather social stressors like offences, humiliation, being let down, discrimination, insults, unfair treatment, social exclusion, and injustice. They can cause embitterment, which is associated by constant rumination about the past, as already described above [27]. In legal disputes, injustice and past negative events are always a topic. This includes the preservation and emphatic presentation of memories with high emotional involvement. It can come to severe, prolonged, and complicated juridical fights, aggressive reactions, distortion of reports about past processes. Clients may pursue their claims in fruitless and endless battles, react with stubbornness, ignore costs, will not accept compromises, attack their opponents aggressively, and even become more and more embittered; the longer the dispute goes on, legal procedures even become a cause of embitterment. Persons who are suffering from embitterment-related intrusions may themselves commit breaches of law. Court decisions are based on the reporting of facts and the understanding of motivations [57, 58].

Repetition of memorizing and reminding oneself and others of past events can be dangerous. Emotion- and motive-based false memories can severely impair societal processes. Wisdom, forgiveness, and coming to terms with emphatic memories on the past is therefore also important on a societal level. An example is how two wise men, the Nobel Prize winners Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela, brought peace to South Africa after the end of apartheid. They established a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” Mutual injustice and atrocities were acknowledged, amnesty was granted to both parties to the conflict, the past was closed, and instead the future of South Africa was in the center [59].

Politicians, journalists, and lawyers must be aware and understand the psychology of emotions, especially embitterment, emphatic memories, pseudologia, and resulting dysfunctional behavior. Apart from supporting justice, fostering of reconciliation is also an important part of political and legal actions. Clinical and social psychology, as described above, can give help in this regard.

Repetitive and emphatic memories, which result in pseudologia and dysfunctional behavior of individuals or groups, are a source of much individual and social suffering. Memories that arouse resentment, bitterness, need for revenge, and aggressive tendencies are not a problem of the opponent but of one’s own mental status. They can cause that individuals and groups do not find peace and persistently provoke new conflicts. Internal and interactional peace can only be found if memories are let alone and fade away. As it is hardly possible to actively forget, reframing of the past, forgiveness, and wisdom describe avenues to let memories go. Political, medial, and legal procedures can stimulate development in either direction.

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

This study was not supported by any sponsor or funder.

M.L. developed the concept and first draft of the manuscript. B.M. added literature and discussion and revised the manuscript.