Consensus collaboration enhances group and individual recall accuracy

We often remember in groups, yet research on collaborative recall finds “collaborative inhibition”: Recalling with others has costs compared to recalling alone. In related paradigms, remembering with others introduces errors into recall. We compared costs and benefits of two collaboration procedures—turn taking and consensus. First, 135 individuals learned a word list and recalled it alone (Recall 1). Then, 45 participants in three-member groups took turns to recall, 45 participants in three-member groups reached a consensus, and 45 participants recalled alone but were analysed as three-member nominal groups (Recall 2). Finally, all participants recalled alone (Recall 3). Both turn-taking and consensus groups demonstrated the usual pattern of costs during collaboration and benefits after collaboration in terms of recall completeness. However, consensus groups, and not turn-taking groups, demonstrated clear benefits in terms of recall accuracy, both during and after collaboration. Consensus groups engaged in beneficial group source-monitoring processes. Our findings challenge assumptions about the negative consequences of social remembering.     

The applied value of collaborative memory research in aging: Behavioral and neural considerations

Our aim in this paper is to bring attention to the applied value of collaborative memory research in aging. At this time, much collaborative memory research focuses on the negative effects of collaboration in younger adults, and is primarily basic in nature. Here, we highlight the positive effects of collaboration that have received less attention, with a particular emphasis on the applied value of these effects in older adults. We first review studies to show that recalling in a group improves later individual recall and reduces memory errors in older adults. We then outline a four-step approach towards bridging laboratory and applied collaborative memory research, which involves: (1) complementing traditional paradigms with more ecologically valid paradigms, (2) evaluating these paradigms in applied settings, (3) adapting these paradigms for use with cognitively intact and cognitively impaired populations, and (4) modifying these paradigms to examine the neural systems that operate during collaborative recall.     

Can men talk about problems with weight? The therapeutic implications of a discourse analytic study

This paper discusses the implications for counsellors of a discourse analytic study examining men's talk about body weight. It is argued that research in the area of problems with body has neglected the growing pressures on men to manage body as a feature of self. This research perpetuates the dominant discursive construction of men's relationship to body as unproblematic — a construction that may present many barriers to men in seeking help for any distress encountered. An analysis of men's talk is discussed in terms of the expectation that body is not problematic and the observable downplaying of any concerns acknowledged. The accountability of body as a site of regulation also emerges within the extracts presented. It is argued that this property within the accounts resonates with work highlighting the growing pressures on men to exercise control over body. The contradictions between the two discourses identified are discussed in terms of their therapeutic implications. It is postulated that male distress emerging from the growing pressures to maintain body weight may be neglected within primary care and therapeutic domains if discourses formulating such difficulties as not relevant to men remain dominant.     

汉语同音异形词意义识别中的抑制过程

使用被试自定步速逐词阅读的移动窗口技术,考察了视觉呈现的均衡型和偏向型两类汉语同音异形词意义识别中的抑制过程。实验要求被试阅读由三个分句组成的句子。重复条件下,句子第一个分句中的一个词与第三个分句中的一个词同音异形。同不重复条件(用控制词替换重复条件下第一个分句中的同音异形词)相比,重复条件下,被试对第三个分句中均衡型同音异形词之后的第一个区段阅读时间要长,即出现重复性效应。这种效应在偏向型同音异形词中并未出现。这一结果支持VHMR模型的抑制控制模块假设。简单的抑制假设或衰退假设均无法解释上述结果。此外,上述重复性效应仅出现在阅读速度较快的被试身上。这说明正是对无关信息的高效能的抑制,使得被试表现出较快的阅读速度。     

The Development of the Pragma-dialectical Approach to Argumentation

This paper describes the development of pragma-dialectics as a theory of argumentative discourse. First the development of the pragma-dialectical model of a critical discussion is explained, with the rules that are to be complied with in order to avoid fallacies from occurring. Then the integration is discussed of rhetorical insight in the dialectical framework. In this endeavour, the concept of strategic manoeuvring is explained that allows for a more refined and more profoundly justified analysis of argumentative discourse and a better identification of fallacies. The paper ends with a brief overview of current research projects.     

Sociobiology and Moral Discourse

In the intellectual lineage of sociobiology (understood as evolutionary social science), this article considers the place of moral discourse in the evolution of emergent systems for mediating behavior. Given that humans share molecular systems, reflex systems, drive systems, emotional systems, and cognitive systems with chimpanzees, why is it that human behavior is so radically different from chimpanzee behavior? The answer is that, unlike chimps, humans possess symbolic systems, empowering them to override chimplike default morality in favor of symbolically mediated moral codes. The article concludes with a brief discussion of the power of religious symbols to influence moral behavior by reprogramming emotional systems.     

Acknowledge,repeat, rephrase,elaborate: Witnesses can help each other remember more

Crimes are often observed by multiple witnesses. Research shows that witnesses can contaminate each other's memory, but potential benefits of co-witness discussion have not yet been investigated. We examined whether witnesses can help each other remember, or prune each other's errors. In a research design with high ecological validity, attendees of a theatre play were interviewed approximately one week later about a violent scene in the play. The couples that signed up for our study had known each other for 31 years on average. Participants were first interviewed individually and then took part in a collaborative interview. We also included a control condition in which participants took part in two individual interviews. Collaboration did not help witnesses to remember more about the scene, but collaborative pairs made significantly fewer errors than nominal pairs. Further, quantitative and qualitative analyses of retrieval strategies during the discussion revealed that couples who actively acknowledged, repeated, rephrased, and elaborated upon each other's statements remembered significantly more information overall. Taken together, our findings suggest that, under certain circumstances, discussion between witnesses is not such a bad idea after all.     

'I'm Just Saying . . .': Discourse Markers of Standpoint Continuity

Examining discourse markers (Schiffrin, 1987) in two transcribed discussions of controversial issues in an undergraduate 'critical thinking' class, we note frequent uses of 'I'm just saying' and related metadiscursive expressions (I'm/we're saying, I'm/we're not saying, etc.). Our central claim is that these 'saying' expressions are pragmatic devices by which speakers claim 'all along' to have held a consistent argumentative standpoint, one that continues through the discussion unless changed for good reasons. Through close analysis of a series of discourse examples, we show how these discourse markers are used to display continuity, deflect counterarguments, and acknowledge the force of counterarguments while preserving continuity. In a concluding section we reflect critically on the use of these continuity markers with regard to four pragmatic functions that they potentially serve: to specify and clarify argumentative standpoints, to acknowledge a presumption of standpoint continuity, to acknowledge a normative expectation that discussion participants should have standpoints, and to avoid overt disagreement while saving face.