Abstract:It has been demonstrated that both part‐set cues and social interaction can produce detrimental effects on memory. Specifically, part‐set cues lead to part‐set cueing impairment, while social interaction can result in collaborative inhibition. However, there is less evidence on whether these factors have isolated or comparable impacts on memory. Additionally, it is still unknown whether the effects behave similarly on item memory and source memory, whether the effects are comparable between ongoing and post‐social collaboration, and whether stimulus features influence their respective roles. To address these issues, we conducted the current experiment where participants were exposed to gender stereotype‐consistent or ‐inconsistent words, categorized as positive, neutral, or negative. The words were read out by either a male or a female. Two recall sessions were conducted: Recall 1 was carried out either individually or collaboratively, whereas Recall 2 was always collaborative. Some participants performed Recall 1 under the part‐set cued condition while others were under the no‐cued condition. Both item memory and source memory were assessed in both recall sessions. The results have three implications. First, during the ongoing collaborative session, two effects were observed on item memory: part‐set cueing impairment and collaborative inhibition. Further, the contributions elicited by part‐set cues and social collaboration are isolated. The part‐set cueing impairment was influenced by both emotional valence and stereotypical consistency. Second, post‐collaboration analysis indicated that both the utilization of part‐set cues and collaboration itself enhanced item memory, resulting in the part‐set cueing enhancement and post‐collaborative memory benefit. Additionally, there was evidence indicating that the mechanisms prompted by these two factors intertwined when emotional valence and stereotypical consistency were considered. Third, in both ongoing and post‐collaboration scenarios, the detrimental and beneficial effects on item memory and source memory exhibited different patterns, thereby supporting the dual‐process models. These findings enhance our comprehension of the insolation and the interplay between part‐set cues and collaboration in memory.

The Generative Mechanism of the Isolation Effect of JOL(continued)

THE INFLUENCE OF INDIVIDUAL FACTOR ON ISOLATION EFFECT OF JOL

The Influence by the Material Factor on the Isolation Effect of JOL

JOLs' Operating Mechanism:Experience-based and Theory-Based

Differential Neural Correlates Underlie Judgment of Learning and Subsequent Memory Performance

Judgments of learning reactively affect memory by inducing covert retrieval

The Relationship Between Judgments of Learning and Allocation of Study Time

Making judgments of learning enhances memory by inducing item-specific processing

Metacognitive judgments can potentiate new learning: The role of covert retrieval

Neural dynamics of metacognitive monitoring: a dual-stage perspective on judgments of learning

Judgments of learning reactively facilitate visual memory by enhancing learning engagement

Judgments of learning in bilinguals: Does studying in a L2 hinder learning monitoring?

Judgments of Learning Reactively Improve Memory by Enhancing Learning Engagement and Inducing Elaborative Processing: Evidence from an EEG Study

Item-specific and relational encoding are effective at reducing the illusion of competence

Do changed learning goals explain why metamemory judgments reactively affect memory?

Evaluating the Judgment of Learning: its Limited Impact and the Power of Retrieval on Inductive Learning

Metamemory judgments and design effects: Judgment of learning (JOL) reactivity in free recall is affected by study list structure

What guides the judgment of learning: Memory or heuristics? An event-related potential study

Probing the effect of perceptual (dis)fluency on metacognitive judgments

The Effect of Word Frequency on Judgments of Learning: Contributions of Beliefs and Processing Fluency

The isolation between part‐set cues and social collaboration in episodic memory is dependent: Insight from ongoing and post‐collaboration