Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion 5.

2 (2017/2020): 224–237 JCSR ISSN (print) 2049-7555

https://doi.org/10.1558/jcsr.40903 JCSR ISSN (online) 2049-7563

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for

Religious and Nonreligious Cues:
A Comparison between Atheists, Christians,
and Religiously Uncommitted People in Sweden

Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud

Linköping University

nathalie.hallin@liu.se; paolahelena@gmail.com; wadad32@hotmail.com

Gerhard Andersson
Linköping University and Karolinska Institute

gerhard.andersson@liu.se

The aim of this study is to investigate religious autobiographical mem-

ories by having self-reported atheist, Christian, and religiously uncom-
mitted Swedes perform the Autobiographical Memory Test (AMT)
with added religious word blocks. The specific aims are to investigate
(1) possible group differences in memory specificity, (2) whether
positive or negative cue words evoked a larger number of specific
memories, and (3) whether participants produced a larger number of
specific memories in response to religious or nonreligious cue words.
Sisty participants were included, with twenty in each group (atheists,
uncommitted, and Christians). No group differences in memory spec-
ificity were found. However, positive and nonreligious cue words were
associated with a larger number of specific memories. The possibility
of using AMT to study cultural differences is discussed.

Introduction
Autobiographical memory is the ability to recall past events experienced by
oneself (Williams et al. 2007). It is often conceptualized as a broader concept
than episodic memory, since autobiographical memories contain both mem-
ories of specific events and more generic self-related material that is more
semantic than episodic in nature, such as remembering one’s home or a fam-
ily member, without any episodic story attached to the memory (Raes et al.
2007). Three functions of autobiographical memory are often regarded as
Keywords: autobiographical memory, religion, memory specificity, culture

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020, Office 415, The Workstation, 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX
Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 225

central. The first is to maintain a sense of continuity in a person’s conception

of self, as well as assist in developing the self. The second central function is
to provide material for interactions with other people. One can for instance
share personal memories to teach others and to strengthen social bonds
through empathy and trust. The third central function of autobiographical
memory is to guide behaviour. This can be done either by using memories
to form attitudes and opinions which affect behaviour, or solve problems by
predicting future outcomes based on past experiences (Bluck 2003).
Religion is often central to a person’s sense of self (King 2003), and can be
used in interactions with others to pass on information (Harris and Koenig
2006), or to strengthen social bonds (Sosis and Alcorta 2003), and is often
associated with values and attitudes (Saroglou et al. 2004). Thus, autobio-
graphical memory is expected to be important to a person’s religiosity.
The present study seeks to contribute to the knowledge of autobiographi-
cal memory connected to religion using the Autobiographical Memory Test
(AMT) with additional religious categories of words. One aim of the study
is to investigate possible differences in memory specificity between active
Christians, convinced atheists and people who do not endorse either of these
views. We hypothesize that Christians will retrieve a larger number of specific
memories than atheists when given positively valanced religious cue words.
A second aim is to examine if positive or negative cue words prompt more
specific memories. The third and final aim is to investigate if Swedes (i.e.,
the whole sample) are more successful in producing specific memories in
response to religious cue words, than in response to nonreligious cue words.
We have no specified hypotheses for the second and third aims.
Autobiographical memories
Conway and Pleydell-Pearce (2000) introduced a model of autobiographi-
cal memory and its relation to the self, called the self-memory system (SMS),
which describes autobiographical memories as “transitory dynamic mental
constructions generated from an underlying knowledge base” (Conway and
Pleydell-Pearce 2000, 261). In this knowledge base, patterns of activation are
based on cues which are evoked through knowledge structures, but seldom
reach consciousness. Levels of knowledge structures can be lifetime periods
(self-delimitated periods of a person’s life, e.g., the first year of university),
general events (single, repeated or sets of associated events, e.g., going to cin-
emas or seeing a specific movie), or event-specific knowledge (details about
events, e.g., what happened in the movie). The superordinate structures can
in turn evoke cues that index the structures at lower levels.
The constant patterns of activation are, however, suppressed by control pro-
cesses in order to avoid interruption of active processing sequences, but are

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

226 Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud, Gerhard Andersson

let through to consciousness if they are conducive to the active goals of the
working self, that is, the person’s current concept of the existing self and idea
of future self, which is based on autobiographical memories. For instance,
if a person’s goal is to determine if he or she should watch a specific movie
again, it might be helpful to recall when the movie was last seen, in what
context, how well the person remembers the movie, and how good it was.
That information would be let through to consciousness, while information
irrelevant to the goal, such as what book the person was reading at the time,
would be suppressed since such information would distract thought processes
which are conducive to the present goal. Thus, an autobiographical memory
is, according to SMS, a stable pattern of activation in knowledge structures,
which is made conscious because it contributes to active goals (Conway and
Pleydell-Pearce 2000).
Autobiographical memory specificity refers to the ability to retrieve a spe-
cific memory, which is defined as the memory of an event lasting no longer
than a day and occurring at a particular time and in a particular place (Wil-
liams et al. 2007). Difficulties in recalling specific autobiographical memories
have been found in people with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major
depressive disorder, suicidal patients, and people with a history of physical or
sexual abuse (Williams et al. 2007). Mood also affects the types of memories
being recalled, and people who are in a sad mood tend to recall more nega-
tive memories (Williams et al. 2007). For this reason, people with anxiety or
depression were excluded from the study described in this paper.
Religion, non-religion and atheism
In many societies, religion plays a central role. For instance, 40.4% of US
citizens, 68.1% of Turks, and 89.5% of Pakistanis report that religion is very
important in their lives. In other societies, however, religion is only impor-
tant for a small minority of the population, such as in Sweden. Only 7.9%
of Swedes report that religion is very important in their lives (Inglehart et
al. 2014). Possibly, lesser societal focus on religion means that memories
associated with religion are less accessible than other memories for Swedes
in general. At least on a macro- and meso-level (Thurfjell 2015), Sweden
has been highly secularized for decades, even though religious groups have
existed throughout the process of secularization. Estimates of the propor-
tion of atheists, nonbelievers, and agnostics in Sweden are often high, e.g.,
46-85% (Zuckerman 2006). According to the World Values Survey con-
ducted in 2014, 57% of Swedes reported not being a member of a religious
organisation and only 5.6% were active members. In the same study, 31.2%
regarded themselves as a religious person, 48.5% thought that they were not
a religious person, and 16.8% thought of themselves as atheists (Inglehart et

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 227

al. 2014). In the European Values Study conducted in 2017, 36.5% report
believing in God, while 58.7% report not believing in God. However, only
27.3% report not believing in any spirit, God, or life force (EVS 2020).
Thurfjell (2015) argues that while traditional Christian beliefs are declining,
Swedes are turning to more individualized religious beliefs (Thurfjell 2015).
Research indicates that many Swedes refrain from seeking religious solace
even when they are facing highly threatening and stressful life-events (Gran-
qvist and Moström 2014).
Wildman, Sosis, and McNamara (2012) argue that studying atheism is rel-
evant because it might contribute to understanding why religiosity seems to
appear spontaneously in all human cultures and times. Andersson (2016),
moreover, suggests that while the cognitive foundations of religiosity have
become an increasingly popular research topic, atheism has not been studied
as much through experimental methods. Since the number of self-reported
atheists and nonreligious people in the world is increasing (WIN-Gallup
International Poll 2012) and industrialized societies are becoming more sec-
ular (Norris and Inglehart 2011), it is relevant to know how being atheist or
nonreligious affects people cognitively. The present study seeks to contribute
to this knowledge by investigating autobiographical memory in atheists, reli-
giously uncommitted people and Christians, all living in a secular country.
In a previous study on religious memories, Xygalatas et al. (2013) exam-
ined memories of a high-arousal religious ritual and found that participants’
confidence in their memories increased over time, while the accuracy of their
memories declined. In her interpretation of this study, van Mulukom argues
that autobiographical memories of rituals, when incorporated in a person’s
life narrative, might function to strengthen their sense of coherence and pur-
pose. Therefore, arguably, the interpretation of the experience is more impor-
tant than the accuracy of the memory (van Mulukom 2017).
Gruneau Brulin, Hill, Laurin, Mikulincer, and Granqvist (2018) compared
access to religious schemas between a Swedish and an American sample of
university students. Participants from the US (N = 106, of which 87 were
women) attended a Christian university where students are required to make
a statement of faith to attend, while Swedish participants (N = 90, of which
65 were women) attended a regular, secular university. Only one participant
in the sample from the US reported no religious faith at all, compared to
57% (fifty-one of ninty participants) of the Swedish sample. In the study,
participants performed a lexical decision task where they quickly had to
decide whether a string of letters on a screen formed an existing word or not.
Access to target words were measured as reaction time. The target words were
either related to welfare, to religion or were neutral. Participants in the Swed-
ish sample had slower reaction times for religious words in general compared
© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020
228 Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud, Gerhard Andersson

to welfare words and neutral words, while participants in the sample from the
US had faster reaction times to religious words than the other types of targets.
When the samples were compared to each other, cultural contexts were found
to have a moderating role for religious words, but not for other words. The
authors thus concluded that there is a cultural difference between the two
samples on access to religious mental schemas, and also suggested that lexical
decision tasks are useful for measuring cultural cognition (Gruneau Brulin et
al. 2018).
Method
Recruitment
Participants were recruited on a university campus, in congregations, and on
forums where a high proportion were likely to be atheists. Posters were put
up at the Linköping University campus. Free Church congregation mem-
bers were recruited in connection with a congregation meeting and by an
e-mail to all members of one congregation. The study was also advertised on
the internet forum for Humanisterna (humanisterna.se, a secular, humanist
organisation promoting separation of religion and politics) as well as Veten-
skap och Folkbildning (vof.se, an association for educating the public about
scientific research). Those who declared interest in the study were given fur-
ther information and were screened in order to ensure that inclusion criteria
were met and to decide which group the participant belonged to. The study
was ethically approved by the institutional review board at Linköping Uni-
versity as part of a Master of Science thesis.
Inclusion criteria and categorization
In order to avoid influence of memory functions, participants were asked to
respond to an open-ended question. Those who reported that they experi-
enced anxiety, depression, or were medicated for such problems were excluded
from the study. Participants were also asked about other possible memory
deficits through another open-ended question. Moreover, they had to be 20
years old or older and have good comprehension of the Swedish language.
Four individuals were excluded for failing to meet the inclusion criteria.
Three had possible memory deficits and one was below 20 years of age. In
addition, two individuals were excluded from analyses because of distractions
and difficulties related to the administration of the test situation.
Those who met these criteria were placed into one of the three groups (athe-
ist, Christian, and uncommitted), based on their agreement with statements
related to philosophy of life (yes/no):
(1) “I actively oppose all belief in any god, religion or supernatural entity,”
(2) “I am open to a possible existence of a higher power/spiritual dimension/

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 229

larger context,” (3) “I have my own belief in a higher power/spiritual dimen-

sion/larger context but am not actively engaged in the issue,” (4) I consider
myself to be actively believing/spiritual,” (5) “I believe in a God/higher power
as defined by my religion,” (6) “I live according to the guidelines and values
prescribed by my religion/spiritual belief,” and (7) “I regularly engage in reli-
gious/spiritual activities (e.g. prayer, assemblies, meditation, scripture studies,
conversations, reflections) at least once a week.”
They also indicated their religious affiliation through the following
statement:
(8) “I consider myself to be:” with the options “Christian,” “Muslim,”
“Buddhist,” “New Age,” and “Other.”
Participants who answered affirmatively on (1) were categorized as Atheists.
Participants who answered affirmative to (4), (5), (6), and (7) and chose
“Christian” on (8), were categorized as Christians. The remaining partici-
pants, who did not reach the inclusion criteria for any of the former groups,
were categorized as uncommitted. Thus, people who considered themselves
to be Christian were categorized as uncommitted if they did not also agree
with (4), (5), (6), and (7).
Participants
Sixty participants (31 men, 29 women, Mage= 33.9 years, age range 20–72
years) completed the study in total, twenty participants in each of the three
groups: Christians, atheists, and uncommitted. For descriptive statistics see
Table 1. The groups did not differ significantly with regard to age, gender or
education level.
Autobiographical Memory Test
The autobiographical memory test (AMT) is a common method of inves-
tigating autobiographical memory specificity, using cue words. Other stud-
ies have used scenarios as cues, while some have simply asked participants
to freely recall as many specific memories as possible during a limited time
period (Williams et al. 2007). By studying autobiographical memory spec-
ificity in relation to religious cue words, we could learn more about how
access to religious memories might differ between religious and non-religious
groups, as well as between cultures.
In this study, a Swedish translation of the Autobiographical Memory Test
(AMT) was used, where positive and negative religious words were added. All
cue words are presented in Table 2, with English translations in parentheses.
Religious words in these two blocks were retrieved from Christian websites
and Bible texts, and were chosen to be as similar to each other as possi-
ble in frequency in common parlance. For this purpose, a number of search

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

230 Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud, Gerhard Andersson

Group Sex N Age Years of Religious influence

higher edu- during upbringing
cation
M SD M SD None Some Clear
Atheists Men 14 33.1 12.6 5.1 2.6 12 2 0
Women 6 35.0 16.9 4.8 3.9 5 0 1
Total 20 33.7 13.6 5.0 2.9 17 2 1
Un- Men 10 31.3 13.9 3.1 2.3 8 1 1
committed Women 10 35.4 13.0 4.1 2.5 7 1 2
Total 20 33.4 13.3 3.6 2.4 15 2 1
Christians Men 7 34.7 16.1 2.6 2.0 0 1 6
Women 13 34.6 14.0 3.6 1.9 2 2 9
Total 20 34.7 14.4 3.2 2.0 2 3 15
Note. Sex, number of participants, age and years of education for each group.
Table 1. Demographic data for each group
results on Google (google.se, with results limited to Swedish sites) were meas-
ured, and the final words varied in number of search results from 13,500 to
287,000. They were also matched with the other AMT words in regard to
word class and tense. The added words were evaluated by a test panel, with
all three groups well-represented. The time limit for reporting a memory was
set to 30 seconds, to maximize the chance of detecting differences between
blocks and groups.
Participants were instructed to describe a memory which they associated
with each word that was read to them. They were told that the memory could
be old or new and that it could either be perceived as trivial or important.
They were encouraged to choose the first memory they thought of and to say
it aloud. The experimenter stressed that the memory should be of a specific
event, which was illustrated by an example. If the memory was personal and
sensitive to the participant, they were asked to merely explain in enough
detail to let the experimenter determine that it was a specific memory. Each
word was both read aloud by the experimenter and presented in writing on
paper. The experimenter prompted the participants after 30 seconds, if a spe-
cific memory had not been presented during that time, by asking “can you
recall a specific/particular occasion/event?” If no answer was given within 30
seconds, the experimenter continued to the next word. After repeated failures
to provide answers, which could indicate that the participant had forgotten
the instructions, a prompt was given. After three practice words, to ensure
participants had understood the task, 30 words divided into five categories

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 231

(positive religious words, negative religious words, positive words, negative

words, and neutral words) were presented. One of the words, “grave” (grav)
from the negative category, was replaced with the word “bomb” (bomb), since
the original word could be associated with religion. All test sessions were
audio recorded.

Positive Negative Religious Religious Neutral

positive negative
ivrig hopplös salighet fördömd enorm
(eager) (hopeless) (bliss) (condemned) (enormous)
stolt misslyckad nåd häda frånvaro
(proud) (unsuccessful) (mercy) (blaspheme) (absence)
lättad bomb änglavakt djävulsk naturliv
(relieved) (bomb) (guard. angel) (devilish) (wildlife)
solig ful frälsa bröd
(sunny) (ugly) (deliver) (bread)
fantastisk värre bönhörd gudsfruktan gräs
(fantastic) (worse) (prayer heard) (fear of God) (grass)
lycklig skyldig välsignad synda leta
(happy) (guilty) (blessed) (sin) (search)
Table 2. Cue words

Procedure
In order to ensure that the two experimenters provided similar answers to
participants’ questions, consensus discussions about the instructions and all
the material were held before the data collection. The complete test pro-
cedure was completed in a room with only the participant and one exper-
imenter present. Participants first received general information about the
procedure and then about AMT. The recording started with the first word of
the test. The order of blocks was alternated for each participant. The words
within blocks were randomly varied as well, but all participants received the
same 30 words. After each session, the experimenter stayed in the room in
order to answer any questions. After this, participants were thanked for their
participation in the study.
The memories provided in the AMT test were written down by the exper-
imenter during the test and coded afterwards. The answers were categorized
into specific memories and nonspecific memories following the AMT man-
ual (Williams 2003). A specific memory refers to a specific event occurring at
a particular time and place, not exceeding one day. If a participant failed to
provide a specific memory, an answer provided after the time limit of thirty

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

232 Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud, Gerhard Andersson

seconds or a memory previously provided for another word were marked as

unspecific memories. The time limit reduced the risk of a ceiling effect, i.e.,
most or all participants producing a specific memory in response to all cue
words. When the proper categorization of memories was unclear, consensus
discussions by the experimenters ensured interrater reliability.
Results
The mean number of specific memories reported for cue words in each word
block are reported in Table 3 and illustrated in Figure 1. The first aim was
to investigate possible differences in memory specificity between the three
groups. A 3 (Group) x 5 (Word Block) repeated-measures ANOVA did not
show a significant effect of group F(2, 57) = 1.148, p = .325, but a significant
effect of word block F(4, 228) = 13.655, p < .001. The interaction between
group and word block was not significant F(8,228) = .948, p = .478. The
second aim was to examine if positive or negative cue words prompted more
specific memories. Subsequent analyses using repeated-measures ANOVA
revealed that participants overall produced significantly more specific mem-
ories in the two positive word blocks (positive and religious positive) than in
the negative word blocks (negative and religious negative) F(1, 59) = 31.48,
p <. 001. Finally, the third aim was to examine if nonreligious or religious
words would lead participants to produce a larger number of specific memo-
ries. The nonreligious word blocks (positive and negative) yielded more spe-
cific memories than the religious word blocks (religious positive and religious
negative) F(1, 59) = 14.33, p < .001.
There was a significant negative correlation between age and total number
of reported specific memories, r = -.34 [-.505, -.152] p =.008, but no signifi-
cant correlation between gender and specific memories or years of education
and specific memories.

Word block Total sample Atheist Uncommitted Christian

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
Religious negative 1.98 (1.31) 1.95 (1.43) 2.15 (.88) 1.85 (1.57)
Religious positive 2.72 (1.53) 2.45 (1.70) 3.10 (1.45) 2.60 (1.43)
Negative 2.68 (1.56) 3.00 (1.72) 2.75 (1.45) 2.30 (1.49)
Positive 3.35 (1.63) 3.50 (1.70) 3.70 (1.26) 2.85 (1.84)
Neutral 3.35 (1.55) 3.75 (1.45) 3.30 (1.38) 3.00 (1.78)
Table 3: Mean and Standard Deviations of Specific Memories for Each Word Block

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 233

3,5
Mean Number of Specific Memories Reported

2,5

1,5

0,5

0
Total sample Atheist Uncommitted Christian

Religious negative Religious positive Negative Positive Neutral

Figure 1. Mean number of specific memories in each word block for each group

Discussion
The first aim of the study was to investigate group differences in memory
specificity between Christians, atheists, and religiously uncommitted people.
No such differences were found, contrary to our hypothesis that Christians
would produce a larger number of memories in the positive religious word
block. It can be noted, however, that participants in the uncommitted and
atheist groups produced specific memories in relation to the religious word
blocks, despite living in a highly secularized country and, in some cases, not
being religious at all. One possible explanation is that people might have spe-
cific memories that they associate with religious words even if they are not
themselves engaged in religion. For instance, a person could have a specific
memory involving a religious friend or reading about religion in the newspa-
per. In addition, Sweden has a long Lutheran tradition which might influence
people. At least some of the people in the uncommitted group might fall
into the category that Thurfjell (2015) calls post-Christians, i.e., people who
might participate in some Christian traditions, but lack a commitment to tra-
ditional Christian beliefs. These people might have memories associated with
religious words from attending baptism and confirmation ceremonies, church
weddings, and other Christian activities. Thus, even in a highly secular coun-
try, atheists and nonreligious people have memories associated with religion.
Our second aim was to examine whether positive or negative cue words
would lead to a larger amount of specific memories being reported. The results
showed that the participants could access more specific memories from pos-
itive cue words. Van Vreeswijk and De Wilde (2004) similarly reported that
results from previous studies were mixed regarding positive and negative cue

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

234 Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud, Gerhard Andersson

words, with some studies finding no differences between these word blocks
in regard to time to recall a specific memory, while one study found that
nonclinical participants took longer to recall a specific memory in response
to a negative cue word than in response to a positive cue word. The authors
suggested that the different results might be due to differences in how the
AMT is administered or differences in subject characteristics (Van Vreeswijk
and De Wilde 2004).
The third aim was to investigate differences in memory specificity in
response to religious cue words and nonreligious cue words. Fewer specific
memories were reported when religious cue words were used. This result is in
line with Gruneau Brulin et al. (2018), who found that Swedes had slower
access to religious words than other words in lexical decision tasks. The result
of the present study provides another indication that religion is not as easily
accessed or prominent as other themes in Swedish culture. However, only
Swedish participants were included in this study. To examine possible cultural
differences, future studies could compare memory specificity in response to
religious cue words in different countries. AMT has been used mainly in
clinical populations, but if further studies indicate that AMT or other mem-
ory specificity instruments can predict prominence of a cultural feature, this
could serve as a complement to other methods of studying culture. However,
this would require religious cue words which are similarly used across cultures
and religions.
Another interesting finding was that compared to other nonclinical studies
(Raes et al. 2007), participants in this study reported a lower percentage of
specific memories. Since student populations are often used in nonclinical
studies, this result might indicate that the high level of memory specificity
usually found reflect a high performance of student participants rather than
performance of healthy participants in general. The present study did not
exclusively include students, but the educational level of all the participants
was high. Other possibilities are that Swedes in general perform worse on
AMT or that some unknown difference from previous studies in the proce-
dure caused participants to perform worse.
Limitations
The absence of differences between groups could indicate that the AMT is
not a sufficiently sensitive test to detect differences in memory specificity
between these groups, that no such differences existed in this sample, or that
such differences do not exist between these groups. Another possibility is that
a larger sample size would be required and that the study was underpowered.
Only twenty participants were included in each group, which means that
small group differences which would be detectable with a larger sample can-

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 235

not be ruled out. A strength, however, is that the whole sample completed all
five word blocks, which means that for the analyses which did not investigate
group differences, within-group data exists for all sixty participants. Thus, the
power of these analyses is relatively high.
Since participants were recruited based on self-reported belief or disbelief,
the sample is most likely not representative of the Swedish population. Con-
clusions about Swedish culture based on this study should thus be made with
caution. The recruitment method also revealed to participants that the study
was focused on religion, and both Christian and atheist participants made
explicit comments about wanting to represent their group. The knowledge of
the religious focus might therefore have affected participants’ recall of mem-
ories, by priming them to a religious or atheistic context, which might have
made them consciously or unconsciously suppress certain memories.
Another possible problem is the short time limit of thirty seconds. The
results might have been different if a longer time limit of sixty seconds had
been used, since religious words seemed to require longer memory retrieval
time. It is possible that the religious cue words required longer retrieval time
because they were less common than the words used in the other word blocks.
The two religious word blocks (positive and negative religious words) were
added to the original AMT words. Deliberation was taken in choosing words
which would be equivalent to each other in regard to prevalence in common
parlance and equivalence to the other AMT words in regard to word class
and tense. The chosen words were also evaluated by a test panel. However,
these word blocks have not been used in other studies. Furthermore, the
nonreligious words might be more common than the religious words. The
religious words were likely perceived as old-fashioned and are probably not
commonly used outside of highly religious circles. Thus, even ordinary Chris-
tians might find some of these words difficult to relate to. If the Christian
group in our sample consisted mainly of such Christians, it might explain the
lower amount of memories produced in response to the religious word blocks
and the lack of difference from the other two groups. Had the Christian
group instead consisted of people who were highly religious, the results might
have been different. Thus, it is possible that the difference between memo-
ries retrieved from religious words and nonreligious words reflect the specific
words used, rather than religious and nonreligious words in general. It is also
conceivable that word blocks restricted to a category (in this case religious
words) will yield fewer specific memories than the more general word blocks.
Future research
As mentioned previously, memory specificity in response to religious cue
words could be compared across cultures. If participants in highly religious

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

236 Nathalie Hallin, Paola Törnaeus, Wadad Mahmud, Gerhard Andersson

countries produce more specific memories than those from secular countries,
this might indicate that AMT can be used to study the prominence of a cat-
egory such as religion in a culture. If that is the case, other categories than
religion could be studied using this method, e.g., collectivism and individu-
ality, traditionalism and progressivism, or survival values and self-expression
values. However, if such categories are compared with the standard AMT
word blocks, the added words should be matched for frequency in common
parlance with the existing word blocks.
In conclusion, the present study adds to the literature on mnemonic cog-
nition in relation to religious beliefs and should preferably be followed up by
more research using established cognitive paradigms.
References
Andersson, Gerhard. 2016. “Atheism and How It Is Perceived: Manipulation of, Bias
against and Ways to Reduce the Bias.” Nordic Psychology 68(3): 194–203.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2015.1125304
Bluck, Susan. 2003. “Autobiographical Memory: Exploring Its Functions in Every-
day Life.” Memory 11(2): 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/741938206
Conway, Martin A. and Christopher W. Pleydell-Pearce. 2000. “The Construction
of Autobiographical Memories in the Self-Memory System.” Psychological Re-
view 107(2): 261–288. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.107.2.261
EVS. 2020. European Values Study 2017: Integrated Dataset (EVS 2017). ZA7500
Data file Version 4.0.0. Cologne: GESIS Data Archive. https://doi.
org/10.4232/1.13560
Granqvist, Pehr and Jakob Moström. 2014. “There Are Plenty of Atheists in Foxholes
– in Sweden.” Archive for the Psychology of Religion 36(2): 199–213. https://
doi.org/10.1163/15736121-12341285
Gruneau Brulin, Joel, Peter C. Hill, Kristin Laurin, Mario Mikulincer and Pehr
Granqvist. 2018. “Religion vs. the Welfare State – the Importance of Cultural
Context for Religious Schematicity and Priming.” Psychology of Religion and
Spirituality 10(3): 276–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000200
Harris, Paul L. and Melissa A. Koenig. 2006. “Trust in Testimony: How Children
Learn About Science and Religion.” Child Development 77(3): 505–524.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00886.x
Inglehart, Ronald, Christian Haerpfer, Alejandro Moreno, Christian Welzel, Kseniya
Kizilova, Jaime Diez-Medrano, Marta Lagos, Pippa Norris, Eduard Ponarin
and Bi Puranen, eds. 2014. World Values Survey: Round Six – Country-Pooled
Datafile Version. Madrid: JD Systems Institute. http://www.worldvaluessur-
vey.org/WVSDocumentationWV6.jsp
King, Pamela Ebstyne. 2003. “Religion and Identity: The Role of Ideological, So-
cial, and Spiritual Contexts.” Applied Developmental Science 7(3): 197–204.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532480XADS0703_11

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020

Autobiographical Memory Specificity for Religious and Nonreligious Cues 237

Norris, Pippa and Ronald Inglehart. 2011. Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics
Worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Raes, Filip, Dirk Hermans, J. Mark G. Williams and Paul Eelen. 2007. “A Sentence
Completion Procedure as an Alternative to the Autobiographical Memory
Test for Assessing Overgeneral Memory in Non-Clinical Populations.” Mem-
ory 15(5): 495–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210701390982
Saroglou, Vassilis, Vanessa Delpierre and Rebecca Dernelle. 2004. “Values and
Religiosity: A Meta-Analysis of Studies Using Schwartz’s Model.” Person-
ality and Individual Differences 37: 721–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2003.10.005
Sosis, Richard and Candace Alcorta. 2003. “Signaling, Solidarity, and the Sacred:
The Evolution of Religious Behavior.” Evolutionary Anthropology 12(6): 264–
274. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.10120
Thurfjell, David. 2015. Det Gudlösa Folket. Stockholm: Molin & Sorgenfrei.
van Mulukom, Valerie. 2017. “Remembering Religious Rituals: Autobiographical
Memories of High-Arousal Religious Rituals Considered from a Narrative
Processing Perspective.” Religion, Brain & Behavior 7(3): 191–205. https://
doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2016.1232304
van Vreeswijk, Michiel F. and Erik Jan De Wilde. 2004. “Autobiographical Memory
Specificity, Psychopathology, Depressed Mood and the Use of the Autobio-
graphical Memory Test: A Meta-Analysis.” Behaviour Research and Therapy
42(6): 731–743.
Wildman, Wesley J., Richard Sosis and Patrick McNamara. 2012. “The Scientific
Study of Atheism.” Religion, Brain & Behavior 2(1): 1–3. https://doi.org/10.
1080/2153599X.2012.668394
Williams, J. Mark G. 2003. Autobiographical Memory Test Scoring Manual.
Unpublished.
Williams, J. Mark G., Thorsten Barnhofer, Catherine Crane, Dirk Herman, Filip
Raes, Ed Watkins and Tim Dalgleish. 2007. “Autobiographical Memory
Specificity and Emotional Disorder.” Psychological Bulletin 133(1): 122–148.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.122
Win-Gallup International Poll. 2012. “Global Index of Religion and Atheism.” Press
release. https://www.sidmennt.is/wp-content/uploads/Gallup-Internation-
al-um-tr%C3%BA-og-tr%C3%BAleysi-2012.pdf
Xygalatas, Dimitris, Uffe Schjoedt, Joseph Bulbulia, Ivana Konvalinka, Else-Marie
Jegindø, Paul Reddish, Armin W. Geertz and Andreas Roepstorff. 2013. “Au-
tobiographical Memory in a Fire-Walking Ritual.” Journal of Cognition and
Culture 13(1): 1–16.
Zuckerman, Phil. 2006. “Atheism: Contemporary Numbers and Patterns.” In Cam-
bridge Companions to Philosophy. The Cambridge Companion to Atheism, edit-
ed by Michael Martin, 47–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

© Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2020