Loading…
Disrupters as Well as Monitors: Roles of Others During and After Collaborative Remembering in the DRM Procedure
Influence of others on true and inauthentic memory both during and after collaborative remembering have drawn extensive attention in recent years. Collaborative research has recorded three typical effects: collaborative inhibition and error pruning (i.e., nominal groups recall more true information...
Saved in:
Published in: | Advances in cognitive psychology 2019-12, Vol.15 (4), p.276-289 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-a97555ca59e9c3945b6a1a036428c297e01f66616535da801cca0044ccf969473 |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | 289 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 276 |
container_title | Advances in cognitive psychology |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Nie, Aiqing Ke, Chunchun Li, Mengsi Guo, Bingyan |
description | Influence of others on true and inauthentic memory both during and after collaborative remembering have drawn extensive attention in recent years. Collaborative research has recorded three typical effects: collaborative inhibition and error pruning (i.e., nominal groups recall more true information but also bear higher erroneous intrusions than collaborative groups) during collaboration, as well as post-collaborative recall benefit after collaboration. This study introduced Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists not only to investigate these phenomena in semantically related information, but also set a course to explore false memory in the collaborative context. Another issue is the sensitivity of these effects to different episodic memory tests (i.e., item memory and source memory tests). In views of these, the current study instructed participants to study several DRM lists and then recall previously studied words (item recall) together with their displayed colors (source retrieval) twice (Recall 1 and 2). Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, whereas Recall 2 was conducted individually. The cost of collaborative inhibition was obtained, along with three different beneficial effects: error pruning, false memory reduction, and post-collaborative recall benefit. Furthermore, the novel implication of the current study is that it reveals the sensitivity of collaborative inhibition and error pruning in DRM lists to testing conditions and demonstrates that the modulation of collaboration on false memory occurs in the same way both during and after collaboration. These results are discussed in terms of the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis and other accounts. KEYWORDS collaborative inhibition error pruning source retrieval post-collaborative recall DRM |
doi_str_mv | 10.5709/acp-0275-1 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7251628</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A612928377</galeid><sourcerecordid>A612928377</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-a97555ca59e9c3945b6a1a036428c297e01f66616535da801cca0044ccf969473</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkm1rFDEQxxdRbK2-8RMEBBFha56z8YVw3PkELZVD8WXI5WbvUrLJmewW_PZmbdGeSF7MMPn9_8MM0zTPCT4XCus31h1aTJVoyYPmlHS6JkSRh_fyk-ZJKdcYc0WxftycMMo1Z4SdNmnlS54OI-SCbEHfIYQ5Xqbox5TLW7ROAQpKPboa9zO0mrKPO2TjFi36KkPLFILdpGxHfwNoDQMMG_jN-IiqBq3Wl-hLTg62U4anzaPehgLP7uJZ8-3D-6_LT-3F1cfPy8VF63hHxtZqJYRwVmjQjmkuNtISi5nktHNUK8Ckl1ISKZjY2g4T52wdjzvXa6m5YmfNu1vfw7QZYOsgjtkGc8h-sPmnSdab45_o92aXboyigkjaVYNXdwY5_ZigjGbwxdX12AhpKoZyrKUgTLGKvvgHvU5TjnU8Q1nHO9URqf5SOxvA-Nin2tfNpmYhCdW1p5qp8_9Q9W1h8C5F6H2tHwle3hPswYZxX1KYRp9iOQZf34Iup1Iy9H-WQbCZ78jUOzLzHRnCfgGS3bbH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2384878167</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Disrupters as Well as Monitors: Roles of Others During and After Collaborative Remembering in the DRM Procedure</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Nie, Aiqing ; Ke, Chunchun ; Li, Mengsi ; Guo, Bingyan</creator><creatorcontrib>Nie, Aiqing ; Ke, Chunchun ; Li, Mengsi ; Guo, Bingyan</creatorcontrib><description>Influence of others on true and inauthentic memory both during and after collaborative remembering have drawn extensive attention in recent years. Collaborative research has recorded three typical effects: collaborative inhibition and error pruning (i.e., nominal groups recall more true information but also bear higher erroneous intrusions than collaborative groups) during collaboration, as well as post-collaborative recall benefit after collaboration. This study introduced Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists not only to investigate these phenomena in semantically related information, but also set a course to explore false memory in the collaborative context. Another issue is the sensitivity of these effects to different episodic memory tests (i.e., item memory and source memory tests). In views of these, the current study instructed participants to study several DRM lists and then recall previously studied words (item recall) together with their displayed colors (source retrieval) twice (Recall 1 and 2). Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, whereas Recall 2 was conducted individually. The cost of collaborative inhibition was obtained, along with three different beneficial effects: error pruning, false memory reduction, and post-collaborative recall benefit. Furthermore, the novel implication of the current study is that it reveals the sensitivity of collaborative inhibition and error pruning in DRM lists to testing conditions and demonstrates that the modulation of collaboration on false memory occurs in the same way both during and after collaboration. These results are discussed in terms of the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis and other accounts. KEYWORDS collaborative inhibition error pruning source retrieval post-collaborative recall DRM</description><identifier>ISSN: 1895-1171</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1895-1171</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5709/acp-0275-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32494313</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Warsaw: University of Finance and Management in Warsaw</publisher><subject>Collaboration ; Digital rights (Intellectual property) ; Memory ; Novels</subject><ispartof>Advances in cognitive psychology, 2019-12, Vol.15 (4), p.276-289</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 University of Finance and Management in Warsaw</rights><rights>2019. This work is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Copyright: © 2019 University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-a97555ca59e9c3945b6a1a036428c297e01f66616535da801cca0044ccf969473</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7251628/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2384878167?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,882,25734,27905,27906,36993,36994,44571,53772,53774</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nie, Aiqing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ke, Chunchun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Mengsi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Bingyan</creatorcontrib><title>Disrupters as Well as Monitors: Roles of Others During and After Collaborative Remembering in the DRM Procedure</title><title>Advances in cognitive psychology</title><description>Influence of others on true and inauthentic memory both during and after collaborative remembering have drawn extensive attention in recent years. Collaborative research has recorded three typical effects: collaborative inhibition and error pruning (i.e., nominal groups recall more true information but also bear higher erroneous intrusions than collaborative groups) during collaboration, as well as post-collaborative recall benefit after collaboration. This study introduced Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists not only to investigate these phenomena in semantically related information, but also set a course to explore false memory in the collaborative context. Another issue is the sensitivity of these effects to different episodic memory tests (i.e., item memory and source memory tests). In views of these, the current study instructed participants to study several DRM lists and then recall previously studied words (item recall) together with their displayed colors (source retrieval) twice (Recall 1 and 2). Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, whereas Recall 2 was conducted individually. The cost of collaborative inhibition was obtained, along with three different beneficial effects: error pruning, false memory reduction, and post-collaborative recall benefit. Furthermore, the novel implication of the current study is that it reveals the sensitivity of collaborative inhibition and error pruning in DRM lists to testing conditions and demonstrates that the modulation of collaboration on false memory occurs in the same way both during and after collaboration. These results are discussed in terms of the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis and other accounts. KEYWORDS collaborative inhibition error pruning source retrieval post-collaborative recall DRM</description><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Digital rights (Intellectual property)</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Novels</subject><issn>1895-1171</issn><issn>1895-1171</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNptkm1rFDEQxxdRbK2-8RMEBBFha56z8YVw3PkELZVD8WXI5WbvUrLJmewW_PZmbdGeSF7MMPn9_8MM0zTPCT4XCus31h1aTJVoyYPmlHS6JkSRh_fyk-ZJKdcYc0WxftycMMo1Z4SdNmnlS54OI-SCbEHfIYQ5Xqbox5TLW7ROAQpKPboa9zO0mrKPO2TjFi36KkPLFILdpGxHfwNoDQMMG_jN-IiqBq3Wl-hLTg62U4anzaPehgLP7uJZ8-3D-6_LT-3F1cfPy8VF63hHxtZqJYRwVmjQjmkuNtISi5nktHNUK8Ckl1ISKZjY2g4T52wdjzvXa6m5YmfNu1vfw7QZYOsgjtkGc8h-sPmnSdab45_o92aXboyigkjaVYNXdwY5_ZigjGbwxdX12AhpKoZyrKUgTLGKvvgHvU5TjnU8Q1nHO9URqf5SOxvA-Nin2tfNpmYhCdW1p5qp8_9Q9W1h8C5F6H2tHwle3hPswYZxX1KYRp9iOQZf34Iup1Iy9H-WQbCZ78jUOzLzHRnCfgGS3bbH</recordid><startdate>20191201</startdate><enddate>20191201</enddate><creator>Nie, Aiqing</creator><creator>Ke, Chunchun</creator><creator>Li, Mengsi</creator><creator>Guo, Bingyan</creator><general>University of Finance and Management in Warsaw</general><general>Vizja Press & IT</general><general>University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191201</creationdate><title>Disrupters as Well as Monitors: Roles of Others During and After Collaborative Remembering in the DRM Procedure</title><author>Nie, Aiqing ; Ke, Chunchun ; Li, Mengsi ; Guo, Bingyan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-a97555ca59e9c3945b6a1a036428c297e01f66616535da801cca0044ccf969473</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Digital rights (Intellectual property)</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Novels</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nie, Aiqing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ke, Chunchun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Mengsi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Bingyan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Advances in cognitive psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nie, Aiqing</au><au>Ke, Chunchun</au><au>Li, Mengsi</au><au>Guo, Bingyan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Disrupters as Well as Monitors: Roles of Others During and After Collaborative Remembering in the DRM Procedure</atitle><jtitle>Advances in cognitive psychology</jtitle><date>2019-12-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>276</spage><epage>289</epage><pages>276-289</pages><issn>1895-1171</issn><eissn>1895-1171</eissn><abstract>Influence of others on true and inauthentic memory both during and after collaborative remembering have drawn extensive attention in recent years. Collaborative research has recorded three typical effects: collaborative inhibition and error pruning (i.e., nominal groups recall more true information but also bear higher erroneous intrusions than collaborative groups) during collaboration, as well as post-collaborative recall benefit after collaboration. This study introduced Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists not only to investigate these phenomena in semantically related information, but also set a course to explore false memory in the collaborative context. Another issue is the sensitivity of these effects to different episodic memory tests (i.e., item memory and source memory tests). In views of these, the current study instructed participants to study several DRM lists and then recall previously studied words (item recall) together with their displayed colors (source retrieval) twice (Recall 1 and 2). Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, whereas Recall 2 was conducted individually. The cost of collaborative inhibition was obtained, along with three different beneficial effects: error pruning, false memory reduction, and post-collaborative recall benefit. Furthermore, the novel implication of the current study is that it reveals the sensitivity of collaborative inhibition and error pruning in DRM lists to testing conditions and demonstrates that the modulation of collaboration on false memory occurs in the same way both during and after collaboration. These results are discussed in terms of the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis and other accounts. KEYWORDS collaborative inhibition error pruning source retrieval post-collaborative recall DRM</abstract><cop>Warsaw</cop><pub>University of Finance and Management in Warsaw</pub><pmid>32494313</pmid><doi>10.5709/acp-0275-1</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1895-1171 |
ispartof | Advances in cognitive psychology, 2019-12, Vol.15 (4), p.276-289 |
issn | 1895-1171 1895-1171 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7251628 |
source | Publicly Available Content (ProQuest); PubMed Central |
subjects | Collaboration Digital rights (Intellectual property) Memory Novels |
title | Disrupters as Well as Monitors: Roles of Others During and After Collaborative Remembering in the DRM Procedure |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T03%3A27%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Disrupters%20as%20Well%20as%20Monitors:%20Roles%20of%20Others%20During%20and%20After%20Collaborative%20Remembering%20in%20the%20DRM%20Procedure&rft.jtitle=Advances%20in%20cognitive%20psychology&rft.au=Nie,%20Aiqing&rft.date=2019-12-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=276&rft.epage=289&rft.pages=276-289&rft.issn=1895-1171&rft.eissn=1895-1171&rft_id=info:doi/10.5709/acp-0275-1&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA612928377%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-a97555ca59e9c3945b6a1a036428c297e01f66616535da801cca0044ccf969473%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2384878167&rft_id=info:pmid/32494313&rft_galeid=A612928377&rfr_iscdi=true |