Collaborative memory and part-set cueing impairments: The role of executive depletion in modulating retrieval disruption

Abstract

When people are exposed to a subset of previously studied list items they recall fewer of the remaining items compared to a condition where none of the studied items is provided during recall. This occurs both when the subset of items is provided by the experimenter (i.e., the part-set cueing deficit in individual recall) and when they are provided during the course of a collaborative discussion (i.e., the collaborative inhibition effect in group recall). Previous research has identified retrieval disruption as a common mechanism underlying both effects; however, less is known about the factors that may make individuals susceptible to such retrieval disruption. In the current studies we tested one candidate factor: executive control. Using an executive depletion paradigm we directly manipulated an individual's level of executive control during retrieval. Results revealed no direct role of executive depletion in modulating retrieval disruption. In contrast, executive control abilities were indirectly related to retrieval disruption through their influence at encoding. Together these results suggest that executive control des not directly affect retrieval disruption at the retrieval stage, and that the role of this putative mechanism may be limited to the encoding stage.

Keywords:

• Memory
• Part-set cueing
• Collaborative inhibition
• Retrieval disruption
• Executive depletion

Acknowledgements

This research served as the first author's dissertation under the supervision of the second author, and was supported by an American Psychological Association Dissertation Research Award to Sarah Barber. Thanks are due to Dr Nancy Franklin, Dr Antonio Freitas, and Dr John Lutterbie for serving as members of the dissertation committee and providing valuable comments about this research project. The writing of this manuscript was in part supported by NIH grant #T32-AG00037.

Notes

¹We assessed the part-set cueing deficit by comparing memory on a part-set cued test versus on a free recall test. Although this comparison has been used by previous studies (e.g., Marsh, et al., 2000), it is more common to compare recall on a part-set cued test versus on a category-cued recall test (e.g., Basden & Basden, 1995; Bauml & Aslan, 2006). As noted by a reviewer, our choice to use free recall rather than category cued recall likely means that we underestimate the magnitude of the part-set cueing deficit. This is because participants in the part-set cued condition gain a benefit of have category cues, and this benefit is absent to participants in the free recall condition. However, it is important to note that our analysis of executive depletion's role in retrieval disruption focuses solely on performance in the part-set cued test conditions. Thus, our methodological choice does not impact our ability to draw conclusions about executive depletion's role in modulating retrieval disruption.