The Influence of Judgments of Learning on Collaborative Memory for Items and Sequences.

The present study examined how making judgments of learning (JOLs) vs. not making judgments of learning (no-JOLs) influences item and sequential memory in collaborative contexts. According to the item-order hypothesis, making JOLs improves memory for specific items (i.e., item memory) but disrupts sequential memory where memory for temporal relationships between items is required. If JOLs do enhance item memory performance, the study predicts they may effectively eliminate collaborative inhibition through a compensatory enhancement mechanism. Specifically, the magnitude of JOL-induced memory improvement appears to be greater in collaborative groups than in nominal groups. This differential enhancement likely offsets the typical memory impairment caused by collaborative retrieval interference, resulting in statistically equivalent final performance between groups. Consequently, the collaborative inhibition effect may disappear under JOL conditions. This study employed a 2 (group: collaborative vs. nominal; between-subjects) × 2 (metamemory monitoring: with vs. without judgments of learning; within-subjects) × 2 (test type: recognition vs. sequential reconstruction; within-subjects) mixed factorial design. The findings indicated that making judgments of learning significantly enhanced item memory performance while having no noticeable effect on sequential memory. It suggests that the reactivity effect is only present in item memory. Additionally, it was found that both item recognition and sequential memory performance were lower in the collaborative group compared with the nominal group, highlighting the presence of collaborative inhibition. These results suggest that the reactivity effect and collaborative inhibition are two distinct memory phenomena that do not affect each other.