The Effects of Collaboration and Competition on Pro-Social Prospective Memory

Toward an understanding of motivational influences on prospective memory using value-added intentions

“…Since Penningroth and Scott ( 2007 ) introduced their model, unfortunately very little experimental research has set out to test and validate its predictions. One exception is a recent study by Brandimonte et al ( 2010 ) who showed that associating a PM intention with the pro-social goal to “ help the experimenter to get good data ” resulted in better PM performance compared to a standard PM task (see also D’Angelo et al, 2012 ). Another widely used method to increase personal relevance of a task and thus to motivate good performance is to change the value of the task (Atkinson, 1964 ).…”

The effects of collaboration and punishment on prospective memory performance in a group setting

“…In summary, these findings demonstrate that PM performance can be influenced by motivation levels (e.g., the consequence of one's behavior), social factors (e.g., the group setting), and cognitive processes (e.g., the extent to which executive control processes are allocated to execute the PM task; Browning et al, 2018, D'Angelo et al, 2012; Johansson et al, 2000). Considering the fact that much of everyday life is experienced in collaborative settings, and only three studies have investigated PM in a social context, the present study set out to extend previous findings in an effort to further our understanding of the effect of motivation on PM in a social context.…”

“…In contrast, those assigned to the collaborative, or collaborative plus penalty condition, were instructed that their answers will later be merged with other members of their group (cf. a similar approach, D'Angelo et al, 2012). Those in the collaborative condition were told that their performance can enhance the group's score as only their correct responses will be merged (positive frame), while those in the collaborative plus penalty condition were informed that their performance may negatively impact the group as their incorrect responses will be subtracted from the overall group score (negative frame).…”

“…We know from studies from other fields that social loafing increases with group size and also occurs when individuals believe that their task performance will be merged with that of others (Karau & Williams, 1993; Latané et al, 1979). Previous studies only investigated the effects of collaboration on PM performance in dyads (Browning et al, 2018; D'Angelo et al, 2012; Johansson et al, 2000), and it is unclear how larger group size may affect PM performance. Highly sensitive event‐ and time‐based tasks were administered, which involved high cognitive demands, which allowed us to examine how participants chose to allocate attentional resources.…”

“…As a consequence, individuals who work alone are capable of outperforming individuals in group settings. Social loafing may also take place during the performance of PM tasks as shown by D'Angelo, Bosco, Bianco, and Brandimonte (2012). Participants were assigned to either an individual, collaborative, or competitive condition.…”