# Collaborative Facilitation and Collaborative Inhibition in Virtual Environments
## 1 Introduction
### Collaborative Inhibition and Collaborative Facilitation in Computer-Mediated Communication  
Few studies have examined whether computer-mediated communication (CMC) may mitigate or increase collaborative inhibition in recall. [PERSON] and [PERSON]'s study ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2019) aimed at analysing the possible source of the productivity loss in groups collaborating through different media (FtF or electronic groups) compared to nominal groups and at studying the possible consequences of group recall on the subsequent individual recall. Results showed that group recall products compared to the individual pre-group recall products were of higher quality, suggesting that groups and not individuals have mechanisms for error checking. It was found that nominal groups outperformed compared to spontaneously interacting groups. The study did not find any differences between FtF groups and electronic groups with respect to recalled propositions (i.e., comparable performance) but differences in the type of filter of their contributions (more group-filtering with FtF groups and more self-filtering with electronic groups). Finally, the study showed that the individual post-group recall was improved by the experience of having recalled in an FtF group, but not in an electronic group. Authors considered that the non-verbal cues, in order to propose and ratify contributions to the group product, of the FtF communication supported the enhancement in the post-group recall. More recently, [PERSON] and [PERSON] conducted two studies (study 1 ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2018) and study 2 ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2018)) that aimed to assess whether the semantic recall is sensitive to collaborative inhibition, to test whether CMC may enhance collaborative recall (study 1 and study 2), and to verify whether a subsequent individual semantic recall may be increased by a previous collaboration FtF or via CMC (study 2). About study 1 ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2018), results showed that collaboration may inhibit semantic recall, in addition to episodic recall, and that collaborative inhibition may be mitigated by parallel CMC, which could decrease retrieval strategy disruption. Similar to the results of the study by [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2019), study 1 ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2018) found a different approach to recall tasks for FtF groups (tendency to coordinate recall--clustering) and parallel CMC groups (tendency to participate less in each other's contributions--repetitions). In study 2, [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2018) identified a collaborative inhibition of semantic recall in both FtF and parallel CMC groups compared to nominal groups. Participants who had cooperated in the two previous recalls showed a higher individual recall at the third trial than those who had always individually recalled in the three trials. In contrast to study 1 ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2018), study 2 found no difference between recall in FtF and parallel CMC groups, so the latter did not benefit collaborative recall. However, similarly to study 1 ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2019) and [PERSON] and [PERSON]'s study ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2019), a difference had emerged between the FtF and parallel CMC approaches to recall (i.e., attention to the contributions of others and organisation). Effects of Individual Characteristics: Personality Traits, State Anxiety and Gender on Collaborative Learning  
Other elements to be considered when analysing collaborative learning are individual characteristics [20]. Variables that may influence online learning are personality traits and state anxiety. Few studies have described the relationship between online learning and personality traits, showing contradictory findings [21]. One study reported that people with lower levels of extraversion and higher levels of openness and conscientiousness tend to prefer online training compared to participants who prefer traditional FtF teaching methodologies [22]. In contrast, a study found that, in the context of CSCL, extraverts are active participants [23].