Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering.

Weldon, Mary Susan; Bellinger, Krystal D.

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.23.5.1160

Cited by 336 publications

(586 citation statements)

References 60 publications

(96 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

524

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the collaborative recall procedure was introduced by Weldon and Bellinger (1997) as a measure of ''collective memory'' and the emergent properties of group memory-the title of their paper was ''Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering''-the most commonly cited explanation for collaborative inhibition focuses on individual rather than group processes. Basden, Basden, Bryber, and Thomas (1997) argued that recalling information in a group setting interrupts people's individual retrieval strategies, making them less efficient.…”

Section: Collaborative Recallmentioning

confidence: 99%

A conceptual and empirical framework for the social distribution of cognition: The case of memory

Barnier

Sutton

Harris

et al. 2008

Cognitive Systems Research

158

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we aim to show that the framework of embedded, distributed, or extended cognition offers new perspectives on social cognition by applying it to one specific domain: the psychology of memory. In making our case, first we specify some key social dimensions of cognitive distribution and some basic distinctions between memory cases, and then describe stronger and weaker versions of distributed remembering in the general distributed cognition framework. Next, we examine studies of social influences on memory in cognitive psychology, and identify the valuable concepts and methods to be extended and embedded in our framework; we focus in particular on three related paradigms: transactive memory, collaborative recall, and social contagion. Finally, we sketch our own early studies of individual and group memory developed within our framework of distributed cognition, on social contagion of autobiographical memories, collaborative flashbulb memories, and memories of high school at a high school reunion. We see two reciprocal benefits of this conceptual and empirical framework to social memory phenomena: that ideas about distributed cognition can be honed against and tested with the help of sophisticated methods in the social-cognitive psychology of memory; and conversely, that a range of social memory phenomena that are as yet poorly understood can be approached afresh with theoretically motivated extensions of existing empirical paradigms.

show abstract

Section: Collaborative Recallmentioning

confidence: 99%

A conceptual and empirical framework for the social distribution of cognition: The case of memory

Barnier

Sutton

Harris

et al. 2008

Cognitive Systems Research

158

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In cognitive psychology, the dominant experimental paradigm used to assess the costs and benefits of remembering with others is collaborative recall (Basden, Basden, Bryner, & Thomas, 1997;Basden, Basden, & Henry, 2000;Rajaram, 2011;Rajaram & Pereira-Pasarin, 2010;Weldon & Bellinger, 1997). This paradigm can be used to test the influence of remembering with others both during the collaboration itself and on subsequent individual recall.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Shared encoding and the costs and benefits of collaborative recall.

Harris

Barnier

Sutton

2013

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We often remember in the company of others. In particular, we routinely collaborate with friends, family, or colleagues to remember shared experiences. But surprisingly, in the experimental collaborative recall paradigm, collaborative groups remember less than their potential, an effect termed collaborative inhibition. Rajaram and Pereira-Pasarin (2010) argued that the effects of collaboration on recall are determined by "pre-collaborative" factors. We studied the role of 2 pre-collaborative factors-shared encoding and group relationship-in determining the costs and benefits of collaborative recall. In Experiment 1, we compared groups of strangers who encoded alone versus together, before collaborating to recall. In Experiment 2, we compared groups of friends who encoded alone versus together, before collaborating to recall. We found that shared encoding abolished collaborative inhibition in both Experiments 1 and 2. But prior relationship did not influence collaborative inhibition over and above the effects of shared encoding. Regardless of encoding condition, collaborative group recall contained fewer intrusions than nominal group recall, and these benefits continued in subsequent individual recall. Our findings demonstrate that pre-collaborative factors-specifically shared encoding-have flow-on benefits for group and individual recall amount, but not recall accuracy. We discuss these findings in terms of self-and cross-cuing in collaborative recall.

show abstract

“…Ross, Spencer, Linardator, Lam & Perunovic, 2004). The effect has also been observed for a variety of materials like pictures (Finlay et al, 2000;Weldon & Bellinger, 1997), a movie clip (Ekeocha & Brennan, 2008), stories (Andersson & Collaborative Memory with Assistants 5 Rönnberg, 1995;Takahashi & Saito, 2004;Weldon & Bellinger, 1997), and related words (Basden, Basden, Bryner, & Thomas III, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

The more you remember the more you decide: Collaborative memory in adolescents with intellectual disability and their assistants

Danielsson

Dahlström

Andersson

2011

Research in Developmental Disabilities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

581 83 Linköping, Sweden, or henrik.danielsson@liu.se. Telephone +46 13 28 21 99 and fax +46 13 28 21 45. Collaborative Memory with Assistants 2 AbstractThe aim of the present study was to investigate collaborative memory in adolescents with intellectual disabilities when collaborating with an assistant, and also the extent to which decisiveness is related to individual memory performance.Nineteen students with intellectual disabilities (mean age = 18.5, SD = 0.9) each collaborated with a teaching assistant (mean age 40.3, SD = 12.1) familiar from everyday work in school. Pictures were presented individually. Recognition was performed in two parts; first individually and thereafter collaboratively. The design involved 2 settings, one natural (with equal encoding time) and one with equal individual memory performance (assistants had shorter encoding time than the students). Results showed collaborative inhibition in this previously uninvestigated collaboration setting with adolescents with intellectual disabilities and their assistants.The assistants both performed higher and decided more than the students with intellectual disabilities in the natural setting, but not in the equated performance setting. Inhibition was larger in the equated setting. The assistants' decisiveness was moderately correlated with individual memory performance. Implications for everyday life are discussed.

show abstract

Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering.

Cited by 336 publications

References 60 publications

A conceptual and empirical framework for the social distribution of cognition: The case of memory

A conceptual and empirical framework for the social distribution of cognition: The case of memory

Shared encoding and the costs and benefits of collaborative recall.

The more you remember the more you decide: Collaborative memory in adolescents with intellectual disability and their assistants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About