LAUSR

Collaborative recall by groups of people can evoke both memory detriments (e.g., collaborative inhibition) and benefits (e.g., error pruning and post-collaborative memory benefit). Yet, it remains indeterminate whether these effects are due to the emotional valence of stimuli and/or the specific subtypes of episodic memory tested (i.e., item memory and source memory), and whether they are related to the research procedure of directed forgetting (DF). We introduced item-method DF into collaborative memory research using a turn-taking procedure. The to-be-recalled words were studied in different emotional valences and were followed by either an R or F cue, which, respectively, instructed participants to remember or forget the words presented. We conducted two recall sessions (Recall 1 and Recall 2) that included the two subtypes of episodic memory. Recall 1 was performed either individually or collaboratively, while Recall 2 was always performed individually. We observed three major findings: (a) a collaborative memory decrement - collaborative inhibition - was minimally affected in both item memory and source memory tasks by either the emotional valence of the stimuli or the DF cue; (b) a collaborative memory benefit - error pruning of item memory - persisted within both ongoing and post-collaboration, while error pruning of source memory only presented in ongoing collaboration, thus demonstrating the relevance of dual-process models that differentiate automatic familiarity and effortful recollection processes; and (c) there was no post-collaborative memory benefit, indicating the importance of the type of collaborative procedure. We discuss these results in terms of various theories, including the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis (RSDH) which asserts that memory strategies tend to be disrupted in collaboration but are facilitated within post-collaboration. Also, we describe the implications of these results and directions for exploring other influential factors in future research.