Collective vs. family remembrance: evidence from two Russian betrayals

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985998%3A_____%2F24%3A00597933" target="_blank" >RIV/67985998:_____/24:00597933 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11640/24:00597934

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp787.pdf" target="_blank" >https://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp787.pdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Collective vs. family remembrance: evidence from two Russian betrayals

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Is family or collective remembrance of the distant past more powerful in shaping current behavior? To answer this question, I link two historical episodes from Armenian history separated by a century. During both World War I (WWI) and the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War, Russia was anticipated to provide military support to Armenia, its ally, but failed to do so. I demonstrate that the memories of the first Russian betrayal were activated after the second war. I identify family memory of the first betrayal using distinct West Armenian (Ottoman Armenian) surnames and proxy collective memory through locations renamed to commemorate lost Armenian localities during WWI. The difference-in-differences (DiD) approach shows that both family and collective remembrance negatively affect pro-Russian parties’ vote share, with all the conventional assumptions of DiD verified. Family remembrance influences behavior through traumatic recall, whereas collective remembrance operates via social capital.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Collective vs. family remembrance: evidence from two Russian betrayals

Popis výsledku anglicky

Is family or collective remembrance of the distant past more powerful in shaping current behavior? To answer this question, I link two historical episodes from Armenian history separated by a century. During both World War I (WWI) and the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War, Russia was anticipated to provide military support to Armenia, its ally, but failed to do so. I demonstrate that the memories of the first Russian betrayal were activated after the second war. I identify family memory of the first betrayal using distinct West Armenian (Ottoman Armenian) surnames and proxy collective memory through locations renamed to commemorate lost Armenian localities during WWI. The difference-in-differences (DiD) approach shows that both family and collective remembrance negatively affect pro-Russian parties’ vote share, with all the conventional assumptions of DiD verified. Family remembrance influences behavior through traumatic recall, whereas collective remembrance operates via social capital.

Druh

O - Ostatní výsledky

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50202 - Applied Economics, Econometrics

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů