协同回忆的下游后果:对新学习的影响和对原有学习的保护的检验。

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Garrett D Greeley, Suparna Rajaram
{"title":"协同回忆的下游后果:对新学习的影响和对原有学习的保护的检验。","authors":"Garrett D Greeley, Suparna Rajaram","doi":"10.3758/s13421-025-01730-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Collaboration influences memory during group recall (e.g., collaborative inhibition) and downstream, impacting individual recall (e.g., retrieval gains) and memory convergence (e.g., collective memory) following the interaction. The current study tested the scope of this downstream reach as we examined whether prior collaborative recall, compared with individual recall, improves subsequent learning. Further, we assessed whether group recall protects original learning-that is, if collaboration helps individuals distinguish learning episodes and if postcollaborative effects persist even as new learning occurs. In two experiments, participants worked individually or in collaborative groups to recall a word list. Next, participants studied a new list of words that were semantically related to the original list before recalling the most recently studied list (noncumulative recall; Experiment 1) or both lists (cumulative recall; Experiment 2). Interestingly, collaborative and individual retrieval influenced subsequent learning of new material similarly. However, collaboration protected original learning; former collaborators recalled fewer prior-list intrusions (Experiment 1), and they were better at identifying when words appeared on the original list (Experiment 2). Moreover, postcollaborative retrieval gains and collective memory for the originally studied material persisted as new learning occurred (Experiment 2). These novel findings suggest that while collaborative retrieval may not readily improve subsequent learning compared with individual retrieval, group recall confers a downstream source-monitoring advantage and postcollaboration effects are resilient in the face of subsequent learning. We discuss how these findings align with relevant theoretical accounts that emphasize the importance of contextual dynamics and highlight the potential for more applied research on this topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Downstream consequences of collaborative recall: Testing the influence on new learning and protection of original learning.\",\"authors\":\"Garrett D Greeley, Suparna Rajaram\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13421-025-01730-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Collaboration influences memory during group recall (e.g., collaborative inhibition) and downstream, impacting individual recall (e.g., retrieval gains) and memory convergence (e.g., collective memory) following the interaction. The current study tested the scope of this downstream reach as we examined whether prior collaborative recall, compared with individual recall, improves subsequent learning. Further, we assessed whether group recall protects original learning-that is, if collaboration helps individuals distinguish learning episodes and if postcollaborative effects persist even as new learning occurs. In two experiments, participants worked individually or in collaborative groups to recall a word list. Next, participants studied a new list of words that were semantically related to the original list before recalling the most recently studied list (noncumulative recall; Experiment 1) or both lists (cumulative recall; Experiment 2). Interestingly, collaborative and individual retrieval influenced subsequent learning of new material similarly. However, collaboration protected original learning; former collaborators recalled fewer prior-list intrusions (Experiment 1), and they were better at identifying when words appeared on the original list (Experiment 2). Moreover, postcollaborative retrieval gains and collective memory for the originally studied material persisted as new learning occurred (Experiment 2). These novel findings suggest that while collaborative retrieval may not readily improve subsequent learning compared with individual retrieval, group recall confers a downstream source-monitoring advantage and postcollaboration effects are resilient in the face of subsequent learning. We discuss how these findings align with relevant theoretical accounts that emphasize the importance of contextual dynamics and highlight the potential for more applied research on this topic.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Memory & Cognition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Memory & Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01730-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01730-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

协作影响群体回忆(如合作抑制)和下游的记忆,影响个体回忆(如检索增益)和记忆趋同(如集体记忆)。当前的研究测试了这种下游影响的范围,我们考察了与个人回忆相比,先前的协作回忆是否能改善随后的学习。此外,我们评估了小组回忆是否保护了原始学习,也就是说,如果合作有助于个人区分学习情节,如果在新的学习发生时,后合作效应仍然存在。在两个实验中,参与者单独或合作小组回忆单词表。接下来,参与者在回忆最近学习过的单词列表(非累积回忆;实验1)或两个列表(累积回忆;实验2)。有趣的是,合作检索和个人检索对后续新材料学习的影响相似。然而,协作保护了原始学习;前合作者回忆起较少的先前列表入侵(实验1),并且他们更好地识别单词何时出现在原始列表中(实验2)。此外,当新的学习发生时,对原始学习材料的协作后检索增益和集体记忆持续存在(实验2)。这些新发现表明,虽然与个体检索相比,协作检索可能不会轻易改善后续学习,但群体回忆具有下游源监测优势,并且面对后续学习时,后合作效应具有弹性。我们讨论了这些发现如何与强调上下文动态重要性的相关理论解释相一致,并强调了对该主题进行更多应用研究的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Downstream consequences of collaborative recall: Testing the influence on new learning and protection of original learning.

Collaboration influences memory during group recall (e.g., collaborative inhibition) and downstream, impacting individual recall (e.g., retrieval gains) and memory convergence (e.g., collective memory) following the interaction. The current study tested the scope of this downstream reach as we examined whether prior collaborative recall, compared with individual recall, improves subsequent learning. Further, we assessed whether group recall protects original learning-that is, if collaboration helps individuals distinguish learning episodes and if postcollaborative effects persist even as new learning occurs. In two experiments, participants worked individually or in collaborative groups to recall a word list. Next, participants studied a new list of words that were semantically related to the original list before recalling the most recently studied list (noncumulative recall; Experiment 1) or both lists (cumulative recall; Experiment 2). Interestingly, collaborative and individual retrieval influenced subsequent learning of new material similarly. However, collaboration protected original learning; former collaborators recalled fewer prior-list intrusions (Experiment 1), and they were better at identifying when words appeared on the original list (Experiment 2). Moreover, postcollaborative retrieval gains and collective memory for the originally studied material persisted as new learning occurred (Experiment 2). These novel findings suggest that while collaborative retrieval may not readily improve subsequent learning compared with individual retrieval, group recall confers a downstream source-monitoring advantage and postcollaboration effects are resilient in the face of subsequent learning. We discuss how these findings align with relevant theoretical accounts that emphasize the importance of contextual dynamics and highlight the potential for more applied research on this topic.

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
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信