Zusammenfassung
Collaborating groups typically show reduced recall relative to nominal groups, i.e., to the cumulated non-redundant recall of the same number of people remembering in isolation-a finding termed collaborative inhibition. Motivated by the results of several previous studies, this study examined in two experiments whether access to study context at test influences the effects of collaboration. In ...
Zusammenfassung
Collaborating groups typically show reduced recall relative to nominal groups, i.e., to the cumulated non-redundant recall of the same number of people remembering in isolation-a finding termed collaborative inhibition. Motivated by the results of several previous studies, this study examined in two experiments whether access to study context at test influences the effects of collaboration. In both experiments, subjects collaborated in triads or recalled previously studied material in isolation. Experiment 1 applied short versus prolonged retention intervals to vary access to study context at test, whereas Experiment 2 used the list-method directed forgetting task and applied remember versus forget instructions to modulate context access. In both experiments, collaborative inhibition was present when access to study context at test was intact (i.e., after the short delay and the remember instruction) but was eliminated when the access was impaired (i.e., after the prolonged delay and the forget instruction). Also, post-collaborative gains for individual recall were greater when context access was impaired and collaborative inhibition was eliminated. The findings demonstrate a critical role of access to study context at test for collaborative inhibition, indicating that impaired context access may reflect a general boundary condition for the recall impairment. The possible role of context reactivation processes for beneficial effects of social recall is discussed.
Altmetric