The role of group configuration in the social transmission of memory: Evidence from identical and reconfigured groups

Choi, Hee Youn; Blumen, Helena M.; Congleton, Adam R.; Rajaram, Suparna

doi:10.1080/20445911.2013.862536

Cited by 31 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the majority of research has focused primarily on the negative effects of collaboration on group memory (i.e., collaborative inhibition), there are also positive effects for later individual memory that occur for both younger and older adults (e.g., Blumen & Rajaram, 2008; 2009; Blumen & Stern, 2011; Blumen, et al, 2014; Choi, et al, 2014; Henkel & Rajaram, 2011; Rajaram & Pereira-Pasarin, 2007; Weldon & Bellinger, 1997; Wissman & Rawson, 2015). Building upon this, the current research suggests that the relative cost of collaborative inhibition and the relative down-stream benefits of collaborative recall do not depend upon the participants’ age or the emotional nature of the to-be-remembered information.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We did because collaboration often leads to higher accuracy on subsequent individual memory tests (e.g., Blumen & Rajaram, 2008; 2009; Blumen & Stern, 2011; Blumen, Young, & Rajaram, 2014; Choi, Blumen, Congleton, & Rajaram, 2014; Henkel & Rajaram, 2011; Rajaram & Pereira-Pasarin, 2007; Weldon & Bellinger, 1997; Wissman & Rawson, 2015). This benefit is thought to occur because collaborative recall can serve as a second study opportunity, re-exposing participants to items that they had forgotten but that their group members recalled.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Younger and older adults’ collaborative recall of shared and unshared emotional pictures

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although a group of people working together recalls more items than any one individual, they recall fewer unique items than the same number of people working apart whose responses are combined. This is known as collaborative inhibition and it is a robust effect that occurs for both younger and older adults. However, almost all previous studies documenting collaborative inhibition have used stimuli that were neutral in emotional valence, low in arousal, and studied by all group members. In the current experiments, we tested the impact of picture-stimuli valence, stimuli arousal, and information distribution in modulating the magnitude of collaborative inhibition. We included both younger and older adults because there are age differences in how people remember emotional pictures that could modulate any effects of emotion on collaborative inhibition. Results revealed that when information was shared (i.e., studied by all group members) there were robust collaborative inhibition effects for both neutral and emotional stimuli for both younger and older adults. However, when information was unshared (i.e., studied by only a single group member) these effects were attenuated. Together these results provide mixed support for the retrieval strategy disruption account of collaborative inhibition. Supporting the retrieval strategy disruption account, unshared study information was less susceptible to collaborative inhibition than shared study information. Contradicting the retrieval strategy disruption account, emotional valence and arousal did not modulate the magnitude of collaborative inhibition despite the fact that participants clustered the emotional, but not neutral, information together in memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Younger and older adults’ collaborative recall of shared and unshared emotional pictures

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers have used the classical collaborative memory paradigm to explore the effects of collaboration 2 . The process of this paradigm is as follows: in the encoding phase, participants usually study items individually.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Item Similarity and Response Competition Manipulations on Collaborative Inhibition in Group Recall

Huan

Zhang

et al. 2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative inhibition refers to when people working together remember less than their predicted potential. The most common explanation for this effect is the retrieval-disruption hypothesis during collaborative recall. However, several recent studies have obtained conflicting results concerning this hypothesis. In the current study, item similarity was manipulated in Experiment 1 by requiring participants to study overlapping or non-overlapping unrelated wordlists. The unstructured instructions were then manipulated during a turn-taking recall task between conditions. The results showed that collaborative inhibition occurred for both overlapping and non-overlapping conditions. Subsequently, response competition during collaborative recall, in addition to item similarity, was manipulated in Experiment 2, and the results showed that when collaborative group members were instructed to recall in turn and monitor their partner’s recall (the medium- and high-response-competition conditions), collaborative inhibition occurred. However, no such effect was shown when collaborative group members were instructed not to communicate with each other, but to simply recall in turn while in a group (low-response-competition condition). Together, these results suggest that the conflicts between the findings of the aforementioned studies were probably caused by differing instructions, which induced response competition in collaborative settings. Aside from retrieval-disruption, other possible mechanisms underlying collaborative inhibition were also discussed.

show abstract

“…This baseline consists of nominal groups or groups in name only, where the same number of participants (as in a collaborative group) individually recall the studied information and the items they recall are summed by removing the overlapping items to calculate the baseline recall score (see Marion & Thorley, ; Rajaram & Maswood, ; Rajaram & Pereira‐Pasarin, ; for reviews and theories). The downstream consequences of collaboration are assessed after collaborative remembering, by asking all participants to provide an individual account of items presented in the original study episode (e.g., Blumen & Rajaram, , ; Choi, Blumen, Congleton, & Rajaram, ; Choi, Kensinger, & Rajaram, ; Congleton & Rajaram, , ).…”

Section: Social Transmission Of False Memories In Small Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The social contagion effect demonstrates that individuals are susceptible to incorporating misinformation they receive from social sources into their memories (Gabbert et al, 2003;Meade & Roediger, 2002;Roediger et al, 2001;Wright et al, 2000). This consequence has critical implications because we receive an overwhelming amount of information-as well as misinformation-from social interactions and the Internet, and we subsequently share it with our social connections (Choi, Blumen, Congleton, & Rajaram, 2014). For instance, even when we might have read or watched accurate reports of breaking news event, it is possible for us to incorporate related misinformation that a colleague later mentions in conversation.…”

Section: Social Contagionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Transmission of False Memory in Small Groups and Large Networks

Maswood

Rajaram

2018

Topics in Cognitive Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sharing information and memories is a key feature of social interactions, making social contexts important for developing and transmitting accurate memories and also false memories. False memory transmission can have wide-ranging effects, including shaping personal memories of individuals as well as collective memories of a network of people. This paper reviews a collection of key findings and explanations in cognitive research on the transmission of false memories in small groups. It also reviews the emerging experimental work on larger networks and collective false memories. Given the reconstructive nature of memory, the abundance of misinformation in everyday life, and the variety of social structures in which people interact, an understanding of transmission of false memories has both scientific and societal implications.

show abstract

The role of group configuration in the social transmission of memory: Evidence from identical and reconfigured groups

Cited by 31 publications

References 33 publications

Younger and older adults’ collaborative recall of shared and unshared emotional pictures

Younger and older adults’ collaborative recall of shared and unshared emotional pictures

The Effect of Item Similarity and Response Competition Manipulations on Collaborative Inhibition in Group Recall

Social Transmission of False Memory in Small Groups and Large Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About