Prospective Memory: Individual Differences in Personality and Working Memory

Individual Differences in Prospective Memory Offloading in Laboratory and Naturalistic Settings

10.31234/osf.io/42mxw ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Hunter Ball ◽

Philip Peper ◽

Durna Alakbarova ◽

Sam Gilbert ◽

Gene Arnold Brewer

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Cognitive Ability ◽

Prospective Memory ◽

High Ability ◽

Memory Ability ◽

Multiple Measures ◽

Good Working

The current study examined whether offloading prospective memory (PM) demands onto the environment through the use of reminders eliminates PM differences typically seen between individuals that have poor or good working memory ability. Over two laboratory sessions scheduled one week apart, participants completed three versions of a PM offloading task with and without the use of reminders, along with multiple measures of working memory. Participants also generated a list of naturalistic intentions to fulfill between sessions and were given an intention to email the experimenter every day. They later indicated which intentions were completed with and without the use of reminders. Consistent with prior research, high working memory participants did better in both laboratory and naturalistic settings when having to rely on their own memory. Critically, however, working memory ability was no longer predictive of performance with the use of reminders. Participants with lower working memory also offloaded more often that high ability participants, but this was not optimally calibrated to actual PM performance. These findings suggest that offloading may be particularly beneficial for those with poor cognitive ability. The theoretical and applied ramifications of these findings are discussed.

Download Full-text

Age and individual differences in prospective memory during a "Virtual Week": The roles of working memory, vigilance, task regularity, and cue focality.

Psychology and Aging ◽

10.1037/a0019771 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 25 (3) ◽

pp. 595-605 ◽

Cited By ~ 70

Author(s):

Nathan S. Rose ◽

Peter G. Rendell ◽

Mark A. McDaniel ◽

Ingo Aberle ◽

Matthias Kliegel

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Prospective Memory ◽

Vigilance Task ◽

Cue Focality

Download Full-text

Individual Differences in Memory and Attention Processes in Prospective Remembering

10.31234/osf.io/xcqfm ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Hunter Ball ◽

Elizabeth A. Wiemers ◽

Gene Brewer

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Prospective Memory ◽

Latent Variable ◽

Structural Equation ◽

Large Scale ◽

Equation Modeling ◽

Attention And Memory ◽

Retrospective Memory ◽

Prospective Remembering

Successful prospective memory (PM) involves not only detecting that an environmental cue requires action (i.e., prospective component), but also retrieval of what is supposed to be done at the appropriate moment (i.e., retrospective component). The current study examined the role of attention and memory during PM tasks that placed distinct demands on detection and retrieval processes. Using a large-scale individual differences design, participants completed three PM tasks that placed high demands on detection (but low demands on retrieval) and three tasks that placed high demands on retrieval (but low demands on detection). Additionally, participants completed three attention control, retrospective memory, and working memory tasks. Latent variable structural equation modeling showed that the prospective and retrospective components of PM were jointly influenced by multiple cognitive abilities. Critically, attention and retrospective memory fully mediated the relation between working memory and prospective memory. Furthermore, only attention uniquely predicted PM detection, whereas only retrospective memory uniquely predicted PM retrieval. These findings highlight the value of independently assessing different PM components and suggest that both attention and memory abilities must be considered to fully understand the dynamic processes underlying prospective remembering.

Download Full-text

Individual Differences in Memory and Attention Processes in Prospective Remembering

10.31234/osf.io/8dkx6 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Hunter Ball ◽

Elizabeth A. Wiemers ◽

Gene Arnold Brewer

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Prospective Memory ◽

Latent Variable ◽

Structural Equation ◽

Large Scale ◽

Equation Modeling ◽

Attention And Memory ◽

Retrospective Memory ◽

Prospective Remembering

Successful prospective memory (PM) involves not only detecting that an environmental cue requires action (i.e., prospective component), but also retrieval of what is supposed to be done at the appropriate moment (i.e., retrospective component). The current study examined the role of attention and memory during PM tasks that placed distinct demands on detection and retrieval processes. Using a large-scale individual differences design, participants completed three PM tasks that placed high demands on detection (but low demands on retrieval) and three tasks that placed high demands on retrieval (but low demands on detection). Additionally, participants completed three attention control, retrospective memory, and working memory tasks. Latent variable structural equation modeling showed that the prospective and retrospective components of PM were jointly influenced by multiple cognitive abilities. Critically, attention and retrospective memory fully mediated the relation between working memory and prospective memory. Furthermore, only attention uniquely predicted PM detection, whereas only retrospective memory uniquely predicted PM retrieval. These findings highlight the value of independently assessing different PM components and suggest that both attention and memory abilities must be considered to fully understand the dynamic processes underlying prospective remembering.

Download Full-text

Immersive virtual reality gameplay captures age differences in naturalistic prospective memory

10.31234/osf.io/ud3ea ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Joseph Saito ◽

Nathan Rose

Keyword(s):

Older Adults ◽

Working Memory ◽

Virtual Reality ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Prospective Memory ◽

Age Differences ◽

Real World ◽

Ecological Validity ◽

Real Life ◽

Phone Calls

Age differences in prospective memory (PM)—memory for delayed intentions—have shown paradoxical patterns between laboratory and naturalistic settings. Virtual reality (VR) has been used to try and enhance the ecological validity of PM assessments, but methodological differences and limited validation have undermined interpretation of previous findings. We compared age differences between VR- and naturalistic-based measures of PM performance for younger (18-30 years) and older (56-83 years) adults (N = 111) to explore the role of task context and familiarity. Participants completed PM tasks embedded in the Job Simulator VR videogame and a Breakfast task that involved setting a table and simulating breakfast food preparation. We also included two real-world measures in which participants tried to remember to exchange personal belongings with the experimenter (Belongings task) and return phone calls at specific times outside the lab (Call-back task). We found comparable age deficits in Job Simulator and the Breakfast task. However, the age-PM paradox persisted in the Belongings and Call-back tasks. Hierarchical regression modeling was conducted to determine the roles of working memory, vigilance, and personality traits in each. Regression analyses revealed that significant variance in lab-based PM performance was accounted for by individual differences in working memory and agreeableness in older adults, while variance in naturalistic PM performance was accounted for by vigilance and neuroticism in young adults. This study suggests that immersive VR gameplay helped to provide ecologically valid PM assessment and advance a theoretical account of the age-PM paradox with a systematic, task-based analysis of age and individual differences in PM. Different mediators predicted young and older adults’ PM differently across real-world and in-lab contexts (despite measuring similar, naturalistic PM in the same individuals in both VR and in real life). There are methodological, cognitive, & personality moderators, but the “paradox” appears to be a real developmental phenomenon.

Download Full-text

Prospective Memory, Personality, and Working Memory

Zeitschrift für Psychologie ◽

10.1027/2151-2604/a000055 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 219 (2) ◽

pp. 108-116 ◽

Cited By ~ 17

Author(s):

Rebekah E. Smith ◽

Deborah Persyn ◽

Patrick Butler

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Prospective Memory ◽

Performance Modeling ◽

Multinomial Model ◽

Personality Dimension ◽

The Future ◽

P Parameter ◽

Event Based

Prospective memory (PM) involves remembering to perform an action in the future. The current study applies a multinomial model to investigate the contribution of individual differences in personality, as well as individual differences in working memory (WM) span, to performance in an event-based PM task. The model includes a parameter P that measures the prospective component, or remembering that something is to be done. The model also includes a parameter M that measures the ability to discriminate between target and non-target events, part of the retrospective component of PM tasks. The model has been applied to investigate the effects of WM variability in just one prior study, but has not been used in previous investigations of personality and PM. WM span and the personality dimension of conscientiousness showed differences between the higher and lower groups in PM performance. Modeling results showed that individuals higher in conscientiousness had higher estimate of M relative to individuals lower on the conscientiousness dimension. Conscientiousness did not affect the P parameter. In contrast, individuals with higher WM span scores had higher estimates of P relative to individuals with lower span scores, but the two WM groups did not differ in terms of parameter M.

Download Full-text