《快报》:协作记忆是否具有指导性功能?考察协作记忆对后续决策的影响。

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Magdalena Abel
{"title":"《快报》:协作记忆是否具有指导性功能?考察协作记忆对后续决策的影响。","authors":"Magdalena Abel","doi":"10.1177/17470218251325246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Remembering together with others can facilitate memory for previously encountered contents, but can also prompt social contagion with information not previously encountered. This study examined whether these effects of collaborative remembering might serve a directive function and guide subsequent individual decisions. Participants were tested in groups of three and completed an adapted version of a prisoner's dilemma. They initially encountered faces of different players on a screen, who cooperated with them or acted as cheaters. Some of these players were encountered by all three participants, others by single participants only. An interpolated memory test on all players was completed individually or collaboratively. During a final decision game, participants were asked to decide whether to cooperate with each player or not. Three experiments were conducted, which additionally varied encoding, the retention interval before the interpolated memory test, and format and instructions for the interpolated memory test. The results consistently showed adaptive decision making. Participants were more likely to cooperate with players who had previously cooperated with them, relative to both new players and cheaters. Interpolated collaborative remembering had no benefit, however; neither for decisions towards directly encountered players, nor for decisions towards players encountered by other participants. Effects of collaborative remembering may thus not serve a directive function and guide future behavior, or at least they may not do so in this adapted version of a prisoner's dilemma.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218251325246"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EXPRESS: Does collaborative remembering serve a directive function? Examining the influence of collaborative remembering on subsequent decision making.\",\"authors\":\"Magdalena Abel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17470218251325246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Remembering together with others can facilitate memory for previously encountered contents, but can also prompt social contagion with information not previously encountered. This study examined whether these effects of collaborative remembering might serve a directive function and guide subsequent individual decisions. Participants were tested in groups of three and completed an adapted version of a prisoner's dilemma. They initially encountered faces of different players on a screen, who cooperated with them or acted as cheaters. Some of these players were encountered by all three participants, others by single participants only. An interpolated memory test on all players was completed individually or collaboratively. During a final decision game, participants were asked to decide whether to cooperate with each player or not. Three experiments were conducted, which additionally varied encoding, the retention interval before the interpolated memory test, and format and instructions for the interpolated memory test. The results consistently showed adaptive decision making. Participants were more likely to cooperate with players who had previously cooperated with them, relative to both new players and cheaters. Interpolated collaborative remembering had no benefit, however; neither for decisions towards directly encountered players, nor for decisions towards players encountered by other participants. Effects of collaborative remembering may thus not serve a directive function and guide future behavior, or at least they may not do so in this adapted version of a prisoner's dilemma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17470218251325246\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218251325246\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218251325246","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与他人一起记忆可以促进对以前遇到的内容的记忆,但也可以促进以前没有遇到的信息的社会传染。这项研究考察了协作记忆的这些影响是否具有指导作用,并指导随后的个人决策。参与者被分成三人一组进行测试,并完成了一个囚徒困境的改编版本。他们首先在屏幕上看到不同玩家的面孔,这些玩家要么与他们合作,要么扮演骗子的角色。其中一些玩家是所有三个参与者都遇到的,而另一些则是单个参与者遇到的。对所有参与者进行了内插记忆测试,测试是单独或合作完成的。在最后的决策游戏中,参与者被要求决定是否与每个参与者合作。三个实验分别改变了编码、内插记忆测验前的保留时间、内插记忆测验的格式和说明。结果一致显示适应性决策。与新玩家和作弊者相比,参与者更有可能与之前与他们合作过的玩家合作。然而,插入式协作记忆没有任何好处;既不能针对直接遇到的玩家做出决定,也不能针对其他参与者遇到的玩家做出决定。因此,协作记忆的效果可能不会起到指导作用,也不会指导未来的行为,或者至少在囚徒困境的这个改编版本中,它们可能不会这样做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EXPRESS: Does collaborative remembering serve a directive function? Examining the influence of collaborative remembering on subsequent decision making.

Remembering together with others can facilitate memory for previously encountered contents, but can also prompt social contagion with information not previously encountered. This study examined whether these effects of collaborative remembering might serve a directive function and guide subsequent individual decisions. Participants were tested in groups of three and completed an adapted version of a prisoner's dilemma. They initially encountered faces of different players on a screen, who cooperated with them or acted as cheaters. Some of these players were encountered by all three participants, others by single participants only. An interpolated memory test on all players was completed individually or collaboratively. During a final decision game, participants were asked to decide whether to cooperate with each player or not. Three experiments were conducted, which additionally varied encoding, the retention interval before the interpolated memory test, and format and instructions for the interpolated memory test. The results consistently showed adaptive decision making. Participants were more likely to cooperate with players who had previously cooperated with them, relative to both new players and cheaters. Interpolated collaborative remembering had no benefit, however; neither for decisions towards directly encountered players, nor for decisions towards players encountered by other participants. Effects of collaborative remembering may thus not serve a directive function and guide future behavior, or at least they may not do so in this adapted version of a prisoner's dilemma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信