Effects of repeated collaborative retrieval on individual memory vary as a function of recall versus recognition tasks

Abstract

Our research examines how prior group collaboration modulates later individual memory. We recently showed that repeated collaborative recall sessions benefit later individual recall more than a single collaborative recall session (Blumen & Rajaram, 2008). Current research compared the effects of repeated collaborative recall and repeated collaborative recognition on later individual recall and later individual recognition. A total of 192 participants studied a list of nouns and then completed three successive retrieval sessions in one of four conditions. While two collaborative recall sessions and two collaborative recognition sessions generated comparable levels of individual recall (CRecall-CRecall-I Recall ∼ CRecognition-CRecognition-I Recall , Experiment 1a), two collaborative recognition sessions generated greater levels of individual recognition than two collaborative recall sessions (CRecognition-CRecognition- IRecognition > CRecall-CRecall- I Recognition , Experiment 1b). These findings are discussed in terms of two opposing mechanisms that operate during collaborative retrieval—re-exposure and retrieval disruption—and in terms of transfer-appropriate processing across collaborative and individual retrieval sessions.

Keywords:

• Collaborative memory
• Collaborative inhibition
• Retrieval disruption
• Transfer-appropriate processing
• Group-strategy hypothesis

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Sarika Saxena and Kayla Young for research assistance and Luciane Pereira-Pasarin for thoughtful comments. This research was a part of the first authors’ dissertation and benefited from the input of committee members Bonita London, Milton Lodge, and Arty Samuel.

Notes

¹Neither final individual recall (Experiment 1a) nor final individual recognition (Experiment 1b) was different for scribers and non-scribers, Fs < 1. Thus the effects of repeated collaborative recall and repeated collaborative recognition on later individual recall and later individual recognition did not vary as a function of the participants’ scriber status during prior collaborative retrieval.