Smith, Zahni2024-06-132024-06-132023https://hdl.handle.net/2440/141242This item is only available electronically.Collaborative remembering occurs in many everyday settings, including social gatherings (for example, a family recalling childhood memories) and courts (for example, deliberating jurors recalling trial evidence). When groups recall shared experiences, they can make mistakes. Researchers have examined whether collaborative groups make more errors than an equivalent number of lone individuals whose recall is pooled (i.e., a nominal group). This is studied by having collaborative and nominal groups study and recall simple stimuli, such as word lists. Collaborative groups typically make fewer errors than nominal groups, as collaborative group members prune each other's errors. Occasionally, however, collaborative groups make more mistakes than nominal groups, suggesting collaboration sometimes harms accuracy. Here, two meta-analyses examined whether nine factors moderate the number of errors collaborative groups make, relative to nominal groups. Three factors moderated the number of errors made. First, when studies deliberately induced errors, collaborative groups made as many errors as nominal groups. However, when studies focussed on spontaneous errors, collaborative groups made fewer errors than nominal groups. Second, the retrieval method groups engage in moderated the number of errors made. Specifically, if collaborative group members took turns to recall items, they made as many errors as nominal groups. When their members recalled in a 'free-for-all' manner, they made fewer errors than nominal groups. Third, whilst collaborative groups generally made fewer errors than nominal groups; this effect was accentuated when they could only add items to their recall that all members agree on. The applied implications of these findings are considered.Honours; PsychologyThesis