We are delighted to announce that Rodoljub Jovanović, a member of the MEMPOP team and a researcher at both the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory in Belgrade and the University of Rijeka, has co-authored a significant new review article entitled “Memory of Violence”. Published in the 2026 issue of the journal Current Opinion in Psychology, this work was developed together with Angela Bermúdez from the University of Deusto. The article provides a comprehensive synthesis of how societies navigate the complex task of remembering and representing past atrocities within diverse cultural and political landscapes.

The review begins by expanding our traditional understanding of violence beyond direct physical harm to include structural and cultural dimensions. While physical violence often dominates collective remembrance because it is easier to grasp and has distinct perpetrators, the authors argue that structural and cultural violence are far less prominent because they are often deeply abstract, diffuse, and normalized within society. By referencing Galtung’s typology, Jovanović and Bermúdez track how these different forms of violence are represented in cultural products, noting that recognition of structural injustice often only comes to the fore through the memory practices of social movements that actively dispute exclusion and oppression.

A central focus of the article is the “narrative normalization” of violence, particularly within history textbooks and other educational media. The authors identify a pervasive pattern where narratives obscure the social, economic, and political structures that sustain violence by decoupling physical acts from the benefits obtained through them. This strategy frames past violence as a natural or inevitable occurrence rather than an instrumental practice, often achieved by removing the agency of perpetrators and marginalizing the voices of victims. Conversely, the article explores the potential of history education to serve as a site for “de-normalizing” violence, fostering a critical historical consciousness that allows students to grapple with ethical questions about responsibility and justice.

Furthermore, the study delves into the socio-psychological patterns that emerge when groups interpret their own collective experiences of harm. The authors discuss the “magnitude gap,” where victims tend to amplify the severity of an event while perpetrators downplay it, and the phenomenon of “competitive victimhood,” which can severely undermine reconciliation efforts. The research illustrates how group identification, specifically tendencies toward ingroup glorification or superiority, can lead to the denial of responsibility for past crimes. By understanding these intricate relationships between identity, memory, and moral perspective, Jovanović and Bermúdez provide essential insights for anyone working toward peace-building and the transformation of violent conflict.

The full article can be accessed through ScienceDirect and is part of a themed issue on Collective Memory.