Literature DB >> 18491499

False memory for associated word lists in individuals and collaborating groups.

Ruth H Maki1, Arne Weigold, Abbigail Arellano.   

Abstract

Using the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm, we investigated recall of presented and nonpresented associated words by collaborating groups, nominal groups, and individuals. In Experiment 1, participants recalled individually and then recalled in collaborating groups. Nominal groups made up of individual recall produced more presented and nonpresented associated words than did collaborating groups. Collaborating groups recalled more presented words than did individuals, but not more nonpresented words. In Experiment 2, collaborating groups versus individuals was a between-subjects variable, and everyone made two recall attempts. For recall, the pattern was the same as that in Experiment 1, in that collaborating groups recalled more presented words than did individuals but about the same number of nonpresented words. In a DRM paradigm, collaborating groups were able to produce more presented words than were individuals, without increasing their false recall.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18491499     DOI: 10.3758/mc.36.3.598

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  11 in total

1.  Mutual inhibition in collaborative recall: evidence for a retrieval-based account.

Authors:  F Finlay; G J Hitch; P R Meudell
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Group collaboration in recognition memory.

Authors:  S E Clark; A Hori; A Putnam; T P Martin
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Social contagion of memory.

Authors:  H L Roediger; M L Meade; E T Bergman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-06

4.  On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall.

Authors:  J DEESE
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1959-07

5.  An item gains and losses analysis of false memories suggests critical items receive more item-specific processing than list items.

Authors:  Daniel J Burns; Nicholas J Martens; Alicia A Bertoni; Emily J Sweeney; Michelle D Lividini
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Collaboration can improve individual recognition memory: evidence from immediate and delayed tests.

Authors:  Suparna Rajaram; Luciane P Pereira-Pasarin
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-02

7.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.

Authors:  G R Loftus; M E Masson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1994-12

8.  Collective memory: collaborative and individual processes in remembering.

Authors:  Mary Susan Weldon; Krystal D Bellinger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  A comparison of group and individual remembering: does collaboration disrupt retrieval strategies?

Authors:  B H Basden; D R Basden; S Bryner; R L Thomas
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  The effects of social pressure on false memories.

Authors:  Matthew B Reysen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-01
View more
  2 in total

1.  The promise of a cognitive perspective on jury deliberation.

Authors:  Jessica M Salerno; Shari Seidman Diamond
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-04

2.  Measuring shared knowledge with group false memory.

Authors:  Yoshiko Arima; Ryoji Yukihiro; Yosuke Hattori
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-07-04       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.