View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

False and veridical collaborative recognition.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: False and veridical collaborative recognition.
Authors: Thorley, Craig (AUTHOR), Dewhurst, StephenA. (AUTHOR)
Source: Memory. Jan2009, Vol. 17 Issue 1, p17-25. 9p. 2 Charts.
Subjects: Recognition (Psychology), Lure field trials, Word recognition ability testing, Vocabulary, Memory, Business partnerships
Abstract: Participants studied DRM words lists (Deese, 1959; Roediger & McDermott, 1995) and then completed a recognition test individually or in a collaborative pair, trio, or quartet. The collaborative groups' responses were compared to those of equivalent sized nominal groups. Non-studied critical lure and studied word recognition increased with group size and these increases were greatest for the collaborative groups. The collaborative groups' critical lure and studied word recognition rates were facilitated as they lowered their response criterion thresholds towards all test words semantically related to those in the DRM lists. Prior collaboration also enhanced later individual critical lure and studied word recognition. The group members believed the critical lures and studied words recognised during collaboration were studied, and they therefore repeated these judgements when tested alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Memory is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 35923678
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: False and veridical collaborative recognition.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Thorley%2C+Craig%22">Thorley, Craig</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dewhurst%2C+StephenA%2E%22">Dewhurst, StephenA.</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Memory%22">Memory</searchLink>. Jan2009, Vol. 17 Issue 1, p17-25. 9p. 2 Charts.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Recognition+%28Psychology%29%22">Recognition (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Lure+field+trials%22">Lure field trials</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Word+recognition+ability+testing%22">Word recognition ability testing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Vocabulary%22">Vocabulary</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Memory%22">Memory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Business+partnerships%22">Business partnerships</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Participants studied DRM words lists (Deese, 1959; Roediger & McDermott, 1995) and then completed a recognition test individually or in a collaborative pair, trio, or quartet. The collaborative groups' responses were compared to those of equivalent sized nominal groups. Non-studied critical lure and studied word recognition increased with group size and these increases were greatest for the collaborative groups. The collaborative groups' critical lure and studied word recognition rates were facilitated as they lowered their response criterion thresholds towards all test words semantically related to those in the DRM lists. Prior collaboration also enhanced later individual critical lure and studied word recognition. The group members believed the critical lures and studied words recognised during collaboration were studied, and they therefore repeated these judgements when tested alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Memory is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=35923678
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/09658210802484817
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 9
        StartPage: 17
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Recognition (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Lure field trials
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Word recognition ability testing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Vocabulary
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Memory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Business partnerships
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: False and veridical collaborative recognition.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Thorley, Craig
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dewhurst, StephenA.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Text: Jan2009
              Type: published
              Y: 2009
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 09658211
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 17
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Memory
              Type: main
ResultId 1