Public events and the organization of autobiographical memory: An overview of the living‐in‐history project
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we summarize a cross‐national research programme, the Living‐in‐History Project, investigating the impact of war, terrorism and natural disaster on the organization of autobiographical memory. More specifically, the aims of this project were: (a) to develop a method for assessing the impact of public events on autobiographical memory; (b) to determine whether there are systemic group differences in the relationship between these two types of knowledge; and (c) to identify factors that are present when personal memory and historical memory become intertwined. This method was used to collect data from 18 samples located in nine countries. We conclude that wars (e.g. the civil war in Bosnia; World War II) and natural disasters (e.g. the Izmit Earthquake) spawn Historically defined Autobiographic Periods (H‐DAPs), but terrorist attacks (e.g. 9/11, the Second Intifada) and nonviolent political upheaval (the fall of the Soviet Union) do not. We also conclude that autobiographical memory and historical memory are interrelated only when public events dramatically alter the fabric of daily life, for a population, for an extended period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it