Collaborative Facilitation and Collaborative Inhibition in Virtual Environments

Worldwide, organizations and small and medium-sized enterprises have already disruptively changed in many ways their physiological inner mechanisms, because of information and communication technologies (ICT) revolution. Nevertheless, the still ongoing COVID-19 worldwide emergency definitely promoted a wide adoption of teleworking modalities for many people around the world, making it more relevant than before to understand the real impact of virtual environments (VEs) on teamwork dynamics. From a psychological point of view, a critical question about teleworking modalities is how the social and cognitive dynamics of collaborative facilitation and collaborative inhibition would affect teamwork within VEs. This study analyzed the impact of a virtual environment (VE) on the recall of individuals and members of nominal and collaborative groups. The research assessed costs and benefits for collaborative retrieval by testing the effect of experimental conditions, stimulus materials, group size, experimental conditions order, anxiety state, personality traits, gender group composition and social interactions. A total of 144 participants were engaged in a virtual Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) classical paradigm, which involved remembering word lists across two successive sessions, in one of four protocols: I-individual/nominal, I I -nominal/individual, I I I -nominal/collaborative, I V -collaborative/nominal. Results suggested, in general, a reduced collaborative inhibition effect in the collaborative condition than the nominal and individual condition. A combined effect between experimental condition and difficulty of the task appears to explain the presence of collaborative inhibition or facilitation. Nominal groups appeared to enhance the collaborative groups’ performance when virtual nominal groups come before collaborative groups. Variables such as personality traits, gender and social interactions may have a contribution to collaborative retrieval. In conclusion, this study indicated how VEs could maintain those peculiar social dynamics characterizing the participants’ engagement in a task, both working together and individually, and could affect their intrinsic motivation as well as performances. These results could be exploited in order to design brand new and evidenced-based practices, to improve teleworking procedures and workers well-being, as well as teleworking teamwork effectiveness.

Inhibitory Process of Collaborative Inhibition: Assessment Using an Emotional Stroop Task

This study investigated the inhibitory process of collaborative inhibition. An emotional Stroop task was manipulated three times after a group-recall task across three experiments. The results showed that, when participants performed an emotional Stroop task immediately after a group-recall task (Experiment 1) or between two subsequent individual-recall tasks after a group-recall task (Experiment 3), they were able to discriminate color information relating to studied but nonrecalled emotional stimuli more rapidly in the collaborative-recall condition than in the nominal-recall condition. This indicated that participants experienced a stronger inhibition effect in the former condition. However, when the emotional Stroop task was performed after the final individual-recall task (Experiment 2), there were no differences in discrimination between the conditions. These results suggest that the inhibition effect occurs immediately after the group-recall phase and lasts until the final individual-recall task is completed (4 minutes or longer in Experiment 3). It is therefore possible to discuss retrieval inhibition as an underlying mechanism of collaborative inhibition.

Collaborative Inhibition in Group Recall: Cognitive Principles and Implications

Collaborative inhibition in recall is a counterintuitive yet widely replicated phenomenon observed in experimental research on memory. Collaborative inhibition refers to the finding where the joint recall of an interacting group is significantly lower than the sum of the nonredundant items that a “nominal group,” or an equal number of individuals working alone, recall. This chapter provides a selective review of the published findings on this phenomenon from laboratory research. The goal is to familiarize the reader with evidence from our work and those of other groups to characterize the nature of the collaborative inhibition effect, to identify the conditions where this effect reduces, disappears, or even reverses, to explore its occurrence across different group structures, and to describe its post-collaborative consequences on memory.

Survival processing eliminates collaborative inhibition

The present experiments examined the effect of processing words for their survival value, relevance to moving and pleasantness on participants’ free recall scores in both nominal groups (non-redundant pooled individual scores) and collaborative dyads. Overall, participants recalled more words in the survival processing conditions than in the moving and pleasantness processing conditions. Furthermore, nominal groups in both the pleasantness condition (Experiment 1) and the moving and pleasantness conditions (Experiment 2) recalled more words than collaborative groups, thereby replicating the oft-observed effect of collaborative inhibition. However, processing words for their survival value appeared to eliminate the deleterious effects of collaborative remembering in both Experiments 1 and 2. These results are discussed in the context of the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis and the effects of both expertise and collaborative skill on group remembering.