The Role and Developmental Characteristics of Judgment of Learning in Collaborative Memory

Abstract: Collaborative memory exists ubiquitously in social situations, but how do people conduct memory monitoring during the collaborative memory process? One type of monitoring that has been widely emphasized and studied in memory monitoring is called Judgment of Learning (JOL). However, previous studies have focused on individual memory, and little is known about the characteristics, role and developmental patterns of JOL in collaborative memory. Given that monitoring of collaborative memory is an important basis for regulating subsequent collaborative memory activities, there is a need to explore the process of memory monitoring in collaborative memory and to examine the differences between collaborative memory monitoring and individual memory monitoring. Experiment 1 combined the paradigm of collaborative memory with that of JOL, and explored the differences in JOL between collaborative memory and individual memory among normal adults, using Chinese two-character nouns as materials and recruiting college students as participants. On the aspect of retrieval, both the collaborative and nominal groups performed two separate retrievals. For the first retrieval, two individuals in each collaborative groups were required to retrieve together, and both individuals in each nominal groups retrieved individually; for the second retrieval, all the participants in both groups retrieved individually on their own. In terms of JOL, before the first retrieval, the collaborative groups predicted group’s retrieval performance and the nominal groups predicted individual retrieval performance; after the first retrieval, both groups predicted individual retrieval performance. Finally, distractor tasks and recall tests were performed. Adopting the same methodology as experiment 1, experiment 2 examined the developmental differences in JOL in the process of collaborative and individual memory by recruiting the third-, fifth-, and seventh-grade students. Experiment 1 found that after making JOL, college students did not experience normative collaborative inhibition, while collaborative facilitation occurred. Experiment 2 found that neither elementary nor middle school students experienced collaborative inhibition after making JOL, and collaborative facilitation did not occur. It was also found that before the first retrieval, participants of all ages had higher self-confidence in collaborative memory and lower predictive accuracy than individual memory. After the first retrieval, collaborative groups of fifth graders, seventh graders and college students had comparable self-confidence and predictive accuracy of individual memory to the nominal groups. However, the third-grade collaborative groups had lower self-confidence and higher predictive accuracy than the nominal groups. The results suggest that JOL involvement can bring about changes in memory effects, which supports the hypothesis that monitoring constrains outcomes. Retrieval results have a feedback effect on participants’ memory monitoring. Beginning in the third grade, participants are able to adjust their JOL based on the retrieval results, which corroborates the hypothesis that results influence monitoring. This study deepens our understanding of the differences between memory monitoring in collaborative and individual memory, and provides empirical inspiration for specific educational practices such as collaborative learning.