scholarly journals Individual differences in event-based prospective memory: Evidence for multiple processes supporting cue detection

2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 304-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. A. Brewer ◽  
J. B. Knight ◽  
R. L. Marsh ◽  
N. Unsworth
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Multiple Processes ◽  
Event Based ◽  
Cue Detection

Prospective memory in amnestic mild cognitive impairment

2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 407-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
STELLA KARANTZOULIS ◽  
ANGELA K. TROYER ◽  
JILL B. RICH
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Attention Switching ◽  
Memory For Intentions ◽  
Neuropsychological Evaluations ◽  
Event Based ◽  
Cue Detection ◽  
Error Types

AbstractIndividuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) often complain of difficulty remembering to carry out intended actions, consistent with findings of impaired prospective memory (PM) in this population. In this study, individuals with aMCI (N = 27) performed worse than healthy controls (N = 27) on the Memory for Intentions Screening Test (Raskin, 2004), including on time- and event-based subscales, and recognition of the intentions. The aMCI participants made more errors overall, but the proportion of the various error types did not differ between the two groups. Across all error types, both groups made more retrospective than prospective errors, especially on event-based PM tasks. Overall, the findings suggest that PM impairment in aMCI is associated with deficient cue detection involving both automatic (as in event-based tasks) and more strategic detection (as in time-based tasks) processes. These difficulties are likely due to a combination of problematic retrospective episodic memory (e.g., reduced encoding and/or consolidation of cue–intention pairings) and executive functions (e.g., decreased self-initiation, attention switching, and/or inhibition on memory tasks). Formal assessment of PM may help characterize the nature of the memory impairment among individuals with aMCI in clinical neuropsychological evaluations. (JINS, 2009, 15, 407–415.)

What was I supposed to do? Effects of individual differences in age and anxiety on preschoolers’ prospective memory

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lavinia Cheie ◽  
Mircea Miclea ◽  
Laura Visu-Petra
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Trait Anxiety ◽  
External Memory ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Ongoing Activity ◽  
Younger Age ◽  
Main Activity ◽  
Event Based

Prospective memory (PM) refers to remembering to perform a previously planned action at the appropriate time or in the appropriate context. The present study investigated the effects of individual differences in age and trait anxiety on PM performance in 3–5- and 5–7-year-olds. Two types of PM measures were used: an event-based task, requiring ongoing activity interruption across two conditions (with/without memory aid), and an activity-based task, requiring PM action implementation after the main activity was finalized. On the event-based PM task, we found that: all children benefited from the external memory aid; the 5–7-year-old group outperformed the 3–5-year-olds; and higher levels of anxiety negatively affected only the younger age group. On the activity-based PM task, we found no significant age-group differences, while higher anxiety negatively predicted children’s PM performance. Findings support and extend the literature on early PM development, revealing the benefits of external cueing and the potential detrimental effects of anxiety.

Do Inhibitory Control Demands Affect Event-Based Prospective Memory Performance in ADHD?

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mareike Altgassen ◽  
Andrea Koch ◽  
Matthias Kliegel
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Ongoing Task ◽  
Word Categorization ◽  
Entire Duration ◽  
Event Based ◽  
Cue Detection ◽  
The Impact

Objective: Empirical evidence on prospective memory (PM) in ADHD is inconsistent. Differential findings have been related to differential executive control demands. This study aimed at exploring the impact of inhibitory control on event-based PM performance in ADHD. Method: Eighteen adults with ADHD and 18 controls performed a word categorization task with an embedded event-based PM task. In addition, participants performed an acoustically presented task that put either low or high loads on inhibitory control processes. Results: Inhibitory load did not differentially affect PM performance: Across both inhibitory load conditions, individuals with ADHD showed reduced PM performance when compared with controls. Moreover, inhibitory load did not influence PM performance across both groups. Conclusion: Possibly, full inhibitory control resources are not necessary during the entire duration of an event-based PM task, but may suffice to be employed after cue detection when needing to interrupt the ongoing task. (J. of Att. Dis. 2019; 23(1) 51-56)

Individual differences in event-based prospective memory

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gene A. Brewer ◽  
Justin B. Knight ◽  
Gregory J. Spillers ◽  
Nash Unsworth ◽  
Richard L. Marsh
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Prospective Memory ◽  
Event Based

scholarly journals Prospective Memory, Personality, and Working Memory

2011 ◽  
Vol 219 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-116 ◽  
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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document