Department of Psychology, College of Educational Sciences, Shanxi Normal University, Shanxi Province, China.
The MOE Frontier Science Center for Brain Science & Brain-machine Integration, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Percept Mot Skills. 2023 Jun;130(3):1040-1076. doi: 10.1177/00315125231163626. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
Collaborative recall by groups of people can evoke both memory detriments (e.g., collaborative inhibition) and benefits (e.g., error pruning and post-collaborative memory benefit). Yet, it remains indeterminate whether these effects are due to the emotional valence of stimuli and/or the specific subtypes of episodic memory tested (i.e., item memory and source memory), and whether they are related to the research procedure of directed forgetting (DF). We introduced item-method DF into collaborative memory research using a turn-taking procedure. The to-be-recalled words were studied in different emotional valences and were followed by either an R or F cue, which, respectively, instructed participants to remember or forget the words presented. We conducted two recall sessions (Recall 1 and Recall 2) that included the two subtypes of episodic memory. Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, while Recall 2 was always performed individually. We observed three major findings: (a) a collaborative memory decrement - collaborative inhibition - was minimally affected in both item memory and source memory tasks by either the emotional valence of the stimuli or the DF cue; (b) a collaborative memory benefit - error pruning of item memory - persisted within both ongoing and post-collaboration, while error pruning of source memory only presented in ongoing collaboration, thus demonstrating the relevance of dual-process models that differentiate automatic familiarity and effortful recollection processes; and (c) there was no post-collaborative memory benefit, indicating the importance of the type of collaborative procedure. We discuss these results in terms of various theories, including the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis (RSDH) which asserts that memory strategies tend to be disrupted in collaboration but are facilitated within post-collaboration. Also, we describe the implications of these results and directions for exploring other influential factors in future research.
群体协作回忆既可以引发记忆损伤（例如，协作抑制），也可以带来记忆收益（例如，错误剔除和协作后记忆收益）。然而，这些效应是否归因于刺激的情绪效价和/或测试的特定情节记忆亚型（即项目记忆和来源记忆），以及它们是否与定向遗忘（DF）的研究程序有关，目前仍不确定。我们使用轮流程序将项目方法 DF 引入协作记忆研究中。待回忆的单词以不同的情绪效价进行学习，然后是 R 或 F 线索，分别指示参与者记住或忘记呈现的单词。我们进行了两次回忆测试（回忆 1 和回忆 2），包括两种情节记忆亚型。回忆 1 可以单独进行或协作进行，而回忆 2 总是单独进行。我们观察到三个主要发现：（a）协作记忆减退 - 协作抑制 - 在项目记忆和来源记忆任务中，无论是刺激的情绪效价还是 DF 线索，都受到最小影响；（b）协作记忆收益 - 项目记忆的错误剔除 - 在持续进行和协作后都持续存在，而来源记忆的错误剔除仅在持续协作中出现，从而证明了区分自动熟悉度和努力回忆过程的双过程模型的相关性；（c）没有协作后记忆收益，表明协作程序类型的重要性。我们根据各种理论讨论了这些结果，包括检索策略干扰假说（RSDH），该假说认为记忆策略在协作中往往会受到干扰，但在协作后会得到促进。此外，我们还描述了这些结果的含义以及在未来研究中探索其他影响因素的方向。
