Optimizing group collaboration to improve later retention

Helena M. Blumen, Kayla E. Young, Suparna Rajaram

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In educational settings, collaborative learning and recall are often encouraged and sometimes required. Yet, we know very little about the cognitive processes that operate during collaboration, and how they can be optimized to improve later individual retention. The current study aimed to address this gap by testing how the operations of three cognitive processes during collaboration: (1) retrieval disruption, (2) re-exposure and (3) cross-cuing, influence the formation of individual and group recall strategies. Across two experiments, 252 undergraduates studied a word list and recalled it in a Collaborative-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (CCII), an Individual-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (ICII), or an Individual-Individual-Individual-Individual (IIII) sequence. A 40-min delay was inserted early (CC-delay-II, IC-delay-II and II-delay-II; Experiment 1) or later in the recall sequence (CCI-delay-I, ICI-delay-I and III-delay-I; Experiment 2) to assess the differential benefits of different recall sequences. Regardless of where the delay occurred in the recall sequence, both collaboration conditions (CC and IC) benefited later individual recall to a greater extent than the individual recall condition (CC. II>. III and IC. II>. IIII). Repeated collaboration (CC) generated greater post-collaborative recall benefits than single collaboration (IC) when the delay was inserted early in the recall sequence (CC-delay-. II>. IC-delay-. II), but the benefits were equivalent when the delay was inserted later in the recall sequence (CC. I-delay-. I-IC. I-delay-. I). Implications for future research and educational applications are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)244-251
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Volume3
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2014

Fingerprint

Learning

Keywords

  • Collaboration benefits
  • Collaborative inhibition
  • Collaborative memory
  • Cross-cuing
  • Group memory
  • Post-collaborative recall benefits
  • Re-exposure
  • Retrieval disruption

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology

Cite this

Optimizing group collaboration to improve later retention. / Blumen, Helena M.; Young, Kayla E.; Rajaram, Suparna.

In: Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Vol. 3, No. 4, 01.12.2014, p. 244-251.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{55299eecd703472a86daa5b2bf127c42,
title = "Optimizing group collaboration to improve later retention",
abstract = "In educational settings, collaborative learning and recall are often encouraged and sometimes required. Yet, we know very little about the cognitive processes that operate during collaboration, and how they can be optimized to improve later individual retention. The current study aimed to address this gap by testing how the operations of three cognitive processes during collaboration: (1) retrieval disruption, (2) re-exposure and (3) cross-cuing, influence the formation of individual and group recall strategies. Across two experiments, 252 undergraduates studied a word list and recalled it in a Collaborative-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (CCII), an Individual-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (ICII), or an Individual-Individual-Individual-Individual (IIII) sequence. A 40-min delay was inserted early (CC-delay-II, IC-delay-II and II-delay-II; Experiment 1) or later in the recall sequence (CCI-delay-I, ICI-delay-I and III-delay-I; Experiment 2) to assess the differential benefits of different recall sequences. Regardless of where the delay occurred in the recall sequence, both collaboration conditions (CC and IC) benefited later individual recall to a greater extent than the individual recall condition (CC. II>. III and IC. II>. IIII). Repeated collaboration (CC) generated greater post-collaborative recall benefits than single collaboration (IC) when the delay was inserted early in the recall sequence (CC-delay-. II>. IC-delay-. II), but the benefits were equivalent when the delay was inserted later in the recall sequence (CC. I-delay-. I-IC. I-delay-. I). Implications for future research and educational applications are discussed.",
keywords = "Collaboration benefits, Collaborative inhibition, Collaborative memory, Cross-cuing, Group memory, Post-collaborative recall benefits, Re-exposure, Retrieval disruption",
author = "Blumen, {Helena M.} and Young, {Kayla E.} and Suparna Rajaram",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.05.002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "244--251",
journal = "Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition",
issn = "2211-3681",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Optimizing group collaboration to improve later retention

AU - Blumen, Helena M.

AU - Young, Kayla E.

AU - Rajaram, Suparna

PY - 2014/12/1

Y1 - 2014/12/1

N2 - In educational settings, collaborative learning and recall are often encouraged and sometimes required. Yet, we know very little about the cognitive processes that operate during collaboration, and how they can be optimized to improve later individual retention. The current study aimed to address this gap by testing how the operations of three cognitive processes during collaboration: (1) retrieval disruption, (2) re-exposure and (3) cross-cuing, influence the formation of individual and group recall strategies. Across two experiments, 252 undergraduates studied a word list and recalled it in a Collaborative-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (CCII), an Individual-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (ICII), or an Individual-Individual-Individual-Individual (IIII) sequence. A 40-min delay was inserted early (CC-delay-II, IC-delay-II and II-delay-II; Experiment 1) or later in the recall sequence (CCI-delay-I, ICI-delay-I and III-delay-I; Experiment 2) to assess the differential benefits of different recall sequences. Regardless of where the delay occurred in the recall sequence, both collaboration conditions (CC and IC) benefited later individual recall to a greater extent than the individual recall condition (CC. II>. III and IC. II>. IIII). Repeated collaboration (CC) generated greater post-collaborative recall benefits than single collaboration (IC) when the delay was inserted early in the recall sequence (CC-delay-. II>. IC-delay-. II), but the benefits were equivalent when the delay was inserted later in the recall sequence (CC. I-delay-. I-IC. I-delay-. I). Implications for future research and educational applications are discussed.

AB - In educational settings, collaborative learning and recall are often encouraged and sometimes required. Yet, we know very little about the cognitive processes that operate during collaboration, and how they can be optimized to improve later individual retention. The current study aimed to address this gap by testing how the operations of three cognitive processes during collaboration: (1) retrieval disruption, (2) re-exposure and (3) cross-cuing, influence the formation of individual and group recall strategies. Across two experiments, 252 undergraduates studied a word list and recalled it in a Collaborative-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (CCII), an Individual-Collaborative-Individual-Individual (ICII), or an Individual-Individual-Individual-Individual (IIII) sequence. A 40-min delay was inserted early (CC-delay-II, IC-delay-II and II-delay-II; Experiment 1) or later in the recall sequence (CCI-delay-I, ICI-delay-I and III-delay-I; Experiment 2) to assess the differential benefits of different recall sequences. Regardless of where the delay occurred in the recall sequence, both collaboration conditions (CC and IC) benefited later individual recall to a greater extent than the individual recall condition (CC. II>. III and IC. II>. IIII). Repeated collaboration (CC) generated greater post-collaborative recall benefits than single collaboration (IC) when the delay was inserted early in the recall sequence (CC-delay-. II>. IC-delay-. II), but the benefits were equivalent when the delay was inserted later in the recall sequence (CC. I-delay-. I-IC. I-delay-. I). Implications for future research and educational applications are discussed.

KW - Collaboration benefits

KW - Collaborative inhibition

KW - Collaborative memory

KW - Cross-cuing

KW - Group memory

KW - Post-collaborative recall benefits

KW - Re-exposure

KW - Retrieval disruption

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920594538&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920594538&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.05.002

DO - 10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.05.002

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84920594538

VL - 3

SP - 244

EP - 251

JO - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

JF - Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

SN - 2211-3681

IS - 4

ER -