Collective memory-work: Origins, theoretical considerations, and practice

Author:

Djordjevic Ana1

Affiliation:

1. Univerzitet u Beogradu, Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju

Abstract

The subject of this paper is social-scientific methodology collective memory-work and its relevance for psychological inquiry. The aim is to present it through elaboration of its historical and theoretical foundations and assumptions, as well as practical guidance for research. From the original idea until current literature, chosen aspects of this methodology are considered within certain theoretical frameworks and debates, with accompanying dilemmas, which is why the paper has polemic character. Introduction outlines the relevance of this methodology, as well as the relevance of the paper, as the first elaborated review of this subject in regional languages. Next follows the historical look at the pioneering project of collective memory-work, its feminist-Marxist background, as well as consideration of several theoretical aspects (subjectification, memories, experience and theory, collective deconstruction, person). Basic assumptions of the memory-work are derived from previous discussion and presented separately. The next section contains main directions of development and applications of the methodology, considerations relevant for psychological topics, and comparison with similar methodologies. Subsequent is the practical part of the paper, where the basic guidance for research is offered through progressive sequencing of the research phases. Finally, dilemmas regarding evaluation criteria for collective memory-work are discussed. In the conclusion, the place and relevance of this methodology for social-scientific and psychological research are summarized.

Publisher

National Library of Serbia

Subject

General Social Sciences

Reference51 articles.

1. Barber, R., et al. (2016). Men’s Stories for a Change. Champaign, IL: Common Ground Publishing.

2. Bruner, J. (2004). Life as Narrative. Social Research: An International Quarterly, god. 71, br. 3: 691-710.

3. Butler, J. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

4. Chamberlain, K. (2012). Do You Really Need a Methodology? Qualitative Methods in Psychology Bulletin 13(1): 59-63.

5. Crawford, J., et al. (1992). Emotion and Gender: Constructing Meaning from Memory. London, Newbury Park, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3