Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38466389›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2024

Collaborative encoding with a new categorization task: a contribution to collaborative memory research.

Nadia Conte, Santiago Pelegrina, Caterina Padulo, Erika Marascia, Beth Fairfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nadia ConteDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territory Sciences, G. D'Annunzio University of Chieti, 66100, Chieti, Italy. nadia.conte@unich.it.
Santiago PelegrinaDepartment of Psychology, University of Jaén, 23071, Jaén, Spain.
Caterina PaduloDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, 80133, Naples, Italy.
Erika MarasciaDepartment of Psychological, Health and Territory Sciences, G. D'Annunzio University of Chieti, 66100, Chieti, Italy.
Beth FairfieldDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, 80133, Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collaborative memory research has focused primarily on the effects of collaboration at recall with collaboration during encoding receiving less attention. In the present study, collaboration was investigated both at encoding and at retrieval to determine its effects and possible interactions. The aim was to clarify whether the collaborative inhibition effect depended on whether the encoding was with the same or with a different partner. A total of 320 participants (160 Italian and 160 Spanish undergraduate students) were administered a modified version of the collaborative memory paradigm with a new categorization task of verbal affective stimuli at encoding. Specifically, they were asked to classify 90 printed words into 6 categories, so as to have 15 words in each category and then did two recall tasks. Participants were assigned to one of five possible conditions according to encoding (collaborative, individual) and recall (collaborative with the same partner, with another partner, and individual). Results show a collaborative encoding deficit and the classic collaborative inhibition effect independently of whether the encoding was collaborative or individual and even in a collaborative recall group that showed a degree of recall output organization comparable to that of the individual recall group. These results are not wholly consistent with a retrieval disruption explanation and are discussed according to divided attention during collaborative recall and how it may contribute to the collaborative inhibition effect.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorInhibition, PsychologicalMental RecallAdolescentAdultAttentionFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38466389
PMCPMC11142965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.