Editing Collective memory (section)

===Cognitive mechanisms underlying collaborative recall===
Certain cognitive mechanisms involved during group recall and the interactions between these mechanisms have been suggested to contribute to the formation of collective memory. Below are some mechanisms involved during when groups of individuals recall collaboratively.<ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1080/09658210701811862|pmid = 18324548|title = Collaborative recall and collective memory: What happens when we remember together?|journal = Memory|volume = 16|issue = 3|pages = 213–230|year = 2008|last1 = Harris|first1 = Celia B.|last2 = Paterson|first2 = Helen M.|last3 = Kemp|first3 = Richard I.|s2cid = 7917681}}</ref><ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />

====Collaborative inhibition and retrieval disruption====
When groups collaborate to recall information, they experience collaborative inhibition, a decrease in performance compared to the pooled memory recall of an equal number of individuals. Weldon and Bellinger (1997) and Basden, Basden, Bryner, and Thomas (1997) provided evidence that retrieval interference underlies collaborative inhibition, as hearing other members' thoughts and discussion about the topic at hand interferes with one's own organization of thoughts and impairs memory.<ref name=":3" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Basden|first1=B. H.|last2=Basden|first2=D. R.|last3=Bryner|first3=S.|last4=Thomas|first4=R. L.|date=September 1997|title=A comparison of group and individual remembering: does collaboration disrupt retrieval strategies?|journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition|volume=23|issue=5|pages=1176–1191|issn=0278-7393|pmid=9293628|doi=10.1037/0278-7393.23.5.1176}}</ref>

The main theoretical account for collaborative inhibition is ''retrieval disruption''. During the encoding of information, individuals form their own idiosyncratic organization of the information. This organization is later used when trying to recall the information. In a group setting as members exchange information, the information recalled by group members disrupts the idiosyncratic organization one had developed. As each member's organization is disrupted, this results in the less information recalled by the group compared to the pooled recall of participants who had individually recalled (an equal number of participants as in the group).<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last1=Rajaram|first1=Suparna|last2=Pereira-Pasarin|first2=Luciane P.|s2cid=20159993|date=November 2010|title=Collaborative Memory: Cognitive Research and Theory|journal=Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science|volume=5|issue=6|pages=649–663|doi=10.1177/1745691610388763|issn=1745-6916|pmid=26161882}}</ref>

Despite the problem of collaborative inhibition, working in groups may benefit an individual's memory in the long run, as group discussion exposes one to many different ideas over time. Working alone initially prior to collaboration seems to be the optimal way to increase memory.

Early speculations about collaborative inhibition have included explanations, such as diminished personal accountability, social loafing and the diffusion of responsibility, however retrieval disruption remains the leading explanation. Studies have found that collective inhibition to sources other than social loafing, as offering a monetary incentive have been evidenced to fail to produce an increase in memory for groups.<ref name=":3">{{cite journal|last1=Weldon |first1=M.S. |last2=Blair |first2=C. |last3=Huebsch |first3=P.D. |year=2000 |title=Group Remembering: Does Social Loafing Underlie Collaborative Inhibition? |journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition |volume=26 |issue=6 |pages=1568–1577 |doi=10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1568|pmid=11185783 }}</ref> Further evidence from this study suggest something other than social loafing is at work, as reducing evaluation apprehension – the focus on one's performance amongst other people – assisted in individuals' memories but did not produce a gain in memory for groups. Personal accountability – drawing attention to one's own performance and contribution in a group – also did not reduce collaborative inhibition. Therefore, group members' motivation to overcome the interference of group recall cannot be achieved by several motivational factors.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research and theory. Vol. 45|date=2004|publisher=Elsevier Academic Press|others=Ross, Brian H.|isbn=0-12-543345-X|location=Amsterdam|oclc=648246609}}</ref>

====Cross-cueing====
Information exchange among group members often helps individuals to remember things that they would not have remembered had they been working alone. In other words, the information provided by person A may 'cue' memories in person B. This results in enhanced recall. During a group recall, an individual might not remember as much as they would on their own, as their memory recall cues may be distorted because of other team members. Nevertheless, this has enhanced benefits, team members can remember something specific to the disruption of the group. Cross-cueing plays a role in formulation of group recall (Barber, 2011).<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Barber|first1=Sarah J.|last2=Rajaram|first2=Suparna|date=July 2011|title=Exploring the relationship between retrieval disruption from collaboration and recall|journal=Memory|language=en|volume=19|issue=5|pages=462–469|doi=10.1080/09658211.2011.584389|issn=0965-8211|pmc=3162101|pmid=21736433}}</ref>

====Collective false memories====

In 2010, a study was done to see how individuals remembered [[Bologna massacre|a bombing that occurred in the 1980s]].  The clock was later set at 10.25 to remember the tragic bomb (de Vito et al. 2009).<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=de Vito|first1=Stefania|last2=Cubelli|first2=Roberto|last3=Della Sala|first3=Sergio|date=May 2009|title=Collective representations elicit widespread individual false memories|journal=Cortex|volume=45|issue=5|pages=686–687|doi=10.1016/j.cortex.2008.08.002|pmid=19111288|s2cid=30103006|issn=0010-9452}}</ref> The individuals were asked to remember if the clock at Bologna central station in Italy had remained functioning, everyone said no, in fact it was the opposite (Legge, 2018). There have been many instances in history where people create a [[false memory]]. In a 2003 study done in the Claremont Graduate University, results demonstrated that during a stressful event and the actual event are managed by the brain differently.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Pezdek|first=Kathy|date=November 2003|title=Event memory and autobiographical memory for the events of September 11, 2001|journal=Applied Cognitive Psychology|language=en|volume=17|issue=9|pages=1033–1045|doi=10.1002/acp.984|issn=0888-4080}}</ref> Other instances of false memories may occur when remembering something on an object that is not actually there or mistaking how someone looks in a crime scene (Legge, 2018). It is possible for people to remember the same false memories; some people call it the "[[Mandela effect]]". The name "Mandela effect" comes from the name of South African civil rights leader [[Nelson Mandela]] whom many people falsely believed was dead. (Legge, 2018). The Pandora Box experiment explains that language complexes the mind more when it comes to false memories. Language plays a role with imaginative experiences, because it makes it hard for humans to gather correct information (Jablonka, 2017).<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Jablonka|first=Eva|date=2017-12-01|title=Collective narratives, false memories, and the origins of autobiographical memory|journal=Biology & Philosophy|language=en|volume=32|issue=6|pages=839–853|doi=10.1007/s10539-017-9593-z|s2cid=90018021|issn=1572-8404}}</ref>

====Error pruning====
Compared to recalling individually, group members can provide opportunities for error pruning during recall to detect errors that would otherwise be uncorrected by an individual.<ref>{{Cite thesis|last=Congleton|first=Adam|date=May 2012|title=The Influence of Retrieval Organization on the Formation and Persistence of Collective Memory|url=https://ir.stonybrook.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11401/71188/Congleton_grad.sunysb_0771E_10900.pdf?sequence=1|publisher=Stony Brook University|page=12|hdl=11401/71188}}</ref>

====Social contagion errors====
Group settings can also provide opportunities for exposure to erroneous information that may be mistaken to be correct or previously studied.<ref>{{Cite journal|doi = 10.3758/bf03196174|title = Social contagion of memory|year = 2001|last1 = Roediger|first1 = Henry L.|last2 = Meade|first2 = Michelle L.|last3 = Bergman|first3 = Erik T.|journal = Psychonomic Bulletin & Review|volume = 8|issue = 2|pages = 365–371|pmid = 11495127|s2cid = 592759|doi-access = free}}</ref>

====Re-exposure effects====
Listening to group members recall the previously encoded information can enhance memory as it provides a second exposure opportunity to the information.<ref name=":4" />

====Forgetting====
Studies have shown that information forgotten and excluded during group recall can promote the forgetting of related information compared to information unrelated to that which was excluded during group recall. Selective forgetting has been suggested to be a critical mechanism involved in the formation of collective memories and what details are ultimately included and excluded by group members. This mechanism has been studied using the socially-shared retrieval induced forgetting paradigm, a variation of the [[Retrieval-induced forgetting|retrieval induced forgetting method]] with individuals.<ref name =unforgettable>{{Cite journal|last1=Coman |first1=Alin |last2=Manier |first2=David |last3=Hirst |first3=William |date=May 2009 |title=Forgetting the unforgettable through conversation: socially shared retrieval-induced forgetting of September 11 memories |journal=Psychological Science |volume=20 |issue=5 |pages=627–633 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02343.x|issn=1467-9280|pmid=19476592|s2cid=5936888 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Coman |first1= Alin |last2=Hirst |first2=William |date=August 2015 |title=Social identity and socially shared retrieval-induced forgetting: The effects of group membership |journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology. General |volume=144 |issue=4 |pages=717–722 |doi=10.1037/xge0000077 |issn=1939-2222 |pmid= 25938179}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cuc |first1=Alexandru |last2=Koppel |first2=Jonathan |last3=Hirst |first3=William |date=August 2007 |title= Silence is not golden: a case for socially shared retrieval-induced forgetting |journal=Psychological Science |volume=18 |issue=8 |pages=727–733 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01967.x|issn=0956-7976|pmid=17680945|s2cid=12292048 }}</ref> The brain has many important brain regions that are directed at memory, the cerebral cortex, the fornix and the structures that they contain. These structures in the brain are required for attaining new information, and if any of these structures are damaged you can get anterograde or retrograde amnesia (Anastasio et al.,p.&nbsp;26, 2012).<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Anastasio|first1=Thomas J.|last2=Ehrenberger|first2=Kristen Ann|last3=Watson|first3=Patrick|last4=Zhang|first4=Wenyi|date=2012|title= Individual and Collective Memory Consolidation|doi=10.7551/mitpress/9173.001.0001|isbn=978-0-262-30166-4}}</ref> Amnesia could be anything that disrupts your memory or affects you psychologically. Over time, memory loss becomes a natural part of amnesia. Sometimes you can get retrograde memory of a recent or past event.<ref>{{Citation|title=Defining Collective Memory|date=2012|work=Individual and Collective Memory Consolidation|pages=41–60 |publisher=The MIT Press|doi=10.7551/mitpress/9173.003.0006|isbn=978-0-262-30166-4}}</ref>