Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Characterization of Prospective Memory and Associated Processes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Prospective Memory

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Psychology ((BRIEFSCOGNIT))

Abstract

Attention in prospective memory research has focused simultaneously on processes that affect prospective memory retrieval and associated scheduling within ongoing tasks. In concert, newer, and often, more sophisticated approaches are being developed. The first part of this chapter focuses on measurement of response times in ongoing tasks and how these response time distributions are affected by holding an intention. The ex-Gaussian distribution is one example that characterizes response time distributions well. Parameters within this model have been used recently to indicate evidence of costs to holding intentions. We also review evidence accumulation models, such as drift diffusion models and linear ballistic accumulator models that have been applied to model choice and response time information. The application of multinomial processing tree (MPT) models to prospective and ongoing task responses is also covered. Finally, we review a very recent computational process model of prospective memory—an effort that is relatively new in the prospective memory field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abney, D. H., McBride, D. M., & Petrella, S. N. (2013). Interactive effects in transfer-appropriate processing for event-based prospective memory: The roles of effort, ongoing task, and PM cue properties. Memory & Cognition, 41, 1032–1045. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0324-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, B. H., Brewer, G. A., Loft, S., & Bowden, V. (2015). Uncovering continuous and transient monitoring profiles in event-based prospective memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 492–499. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0700-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batchelder, W. H., & Riefer, D. M. (1999). Theoretical and empirical review of multinomial process tree modeling. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 57–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayen, U. J., Murnane, K., & Erdfelder, E. (1996). Source discrimination, item detection, and multinomial models of source monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 197–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisiacchi, P. S., Schiff, S., Ciccola, A., & Kliegel, M. (2009). The role of dual-task and task-switch in prospective memory: Behavioural data and neural correlates. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1362–1373.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boywitt, C. D., & Rummel, J. (2012). A diffusion model analysis of task interference effects in prospective memory. Memory & Cognition, 40, 70–82. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0128-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, G. A. (2011). Analyzing response time distributions: Methodological and theoretical suggests for prospective memory researchers. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 219, 117–124. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bröder, A., & Schütz, J. (2009). Recognition ROCs are curvilinear—Or are they? On premature arguments against the two-high-threshold model of recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 587–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015279

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, P. W., Quayle, A., & Frith, C. D. (2001). Brain regions involved in prospective memory as determined by positron emission tomography. Neuropsychologia, 39, 545–555.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ceci, S. J., & Bronfenbrenner, U. (1985). “Don’t forget to take the cupcakes out of the oven”: Prospective memory, strategic time-monitoring, and context. Child Development, 56(1), 152–164.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A.-L., Jaudas, A., Hirschhorn, E., Sobin, Y., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2012). The specificity of prospective memory costs. Memory, 20, 848–864.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (1990). Normal aging and prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 16, 717–726. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.16.4.717

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S. J., Hadjipavlou, N., & Raoelison, M. (2013). Automaticity and control in prospective memory: A computational model. PLoS One, 8(3), e59852. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059852

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297–337.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goschke, T., & Kuhl, J. (1993). Representation of intentions: Persisting activation in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 336–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guynn, M. J. (2003). A two-process model of strategic monitoring in event-based prospective memory: Activation/retrieval mode and checking. International Journal of Psychology, 38, 245–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J. E., & Wilkins, A. J. (1982). Remembering to do this: A theoretical framework and an illustrated experiment. Human Learning, 1(1982), 123–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heathcote, A., Brown, S. D., & Cousineau, D. (2004). QMPE: Estimating lognormal, Wald and Weibull RT distributions with a parameter dependent lower bound. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 277–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heathcote, A., Loft, S., & Remington, R. W. (2015). Slow down and remember to remember! A delay theory of prospective memory costs. Psychological Review, 122, 376–410. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038952

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heathcote, A., Popiel, S. J., & Mewhort, D. J. K. (1991). Analysis of response time distributions: An example using the Stroop task. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 340–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, J. L., Franks, B. A., & Spitler, S. N. (2017). Prior task experience and comparable stimulus exposure nullify focal and nonfocal prospective memory retrieval differences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 1997–2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1217891

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, J. L., Marsh, R. L., & Cook, G. I. (2005). Task interference in time-based, event-based, and dual-intention prospective memory conditions. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 430–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, S. S., & Bayen, U. J. (2015). Modeling criterion shifts and target checking in prospective memory monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037676

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, S. S., Bayen, U. J., & Smith, R. E. (2011). What can the diffusion model tell us about prospective memory? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022808

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. B., Ethridge, L. E., Marsh, R. L., & Clementz, B. A. (2010). Neural correlates of attentional and mnemonic processing in event-based prospective memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.09.005.2010

  • Lacouture, Y., & Cousineau, D. (2008). How to use MATLAB to fit the ex-Gaussian and other probability functions to a distribution of response times. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4, 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loft, S., Bowden, V. K., Ball, B. H., & Brewer, G. A. (2014). Fitting an ex-Gaussian function to examine costs in event-based prospective memory: Evidence for a continuous monitoring profile. Acta Psychologica, 152, 177–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.08.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loft, S., & Remington, R. W. (2013). Wait a second: Brief delays in responding reduce focality effects in event-based prospective memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 1432–1447. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.750677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, J. S., White, K., & Maylor, E. A. (2013). Target context specification can reduce costs in nonfocal prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1757–1764. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033702

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lourenço, J. S., Hill, J. H., & Maylor, E. A. (2015). Too easy? The influence of task demands conveyed tacitly on prospective memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 242. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033702

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., & Hicks, J. L. (1998). Event-based prospective memory and executive control of working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 336–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.2.336

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., Cook, G. I., Hansen, J. S., & Pallos, A. L. (2003). Interference to ongoing activities covaries with the characteristics of an event-based intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 861–870.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Cook, G. I. (2005). On the relationship between effort toward an ongoing task and cue detection in event-based prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.1.68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Watson, V. (2002). The dynamics of intention retrieval and coordination of action in event-based prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 652–659. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.652

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, R. L., Cook, G. I., & Hicks, J. L. (2006). Task interference from event-based intentions can be material specific. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1636–1643.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2000). Strategic and automatic processes in prospective memory retrieval: A multiprocess framework. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, S127–S144. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Umanath, S., Einstein, G. O., & Waldum, E. R. (2015). Dual pathways to prospective remembering. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9(392.) https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00392

  • Meiser, T., & Schult, J. C. (2008). On the automatic nature of the task-appropriate processing effect in event-based prospective memory. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 290–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavawalla, S. P., Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., & Smith, R. E. (2012). Prospective memory following moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: A multinomial modeling approach. Neuropsychology, 26, 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.2.59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliff, R., & Rouder, J. N. (1998). Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychological Science, 9, 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, J., Boywitt, C. D., & Meiser, T. (2011). Assessing the validity of multinomial models using extraneous variables: An application to prospective memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 2194–2210. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.586708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rummel, J., Smeekens, B. A., & Kane, M. J. (2017). Dealing with prospective memory demands while performing an ongoing task: Shared processing, increased on-task focus, or both? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 1047–1062. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000359

  • Schnitzspahn, K. M., Horn, S. S., Bayen, U. J., & Kliegel, M. (2012). Age effects in emotional prospective memory: Cue valence differentially affects the prospective and retrospective component. Psychology and Aging, 27, 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scolaro, A., West, R., & Cohen, A.-L. (2014). The ERP correlates of target checking are dependent upon the defining features of the prospective memory cues. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 93, 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.06.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scullin, M. K., Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (2009). Evidence for spontaneous retrieval of suspended but not finished prospective memories. Memory & Cognition, 37, 425–433. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.4.425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scullin, M. K., McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2010). Control of cost in prospective memory: Evidence for spontaneous retrieval processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 190–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017732

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scullin, M. K., McDaniel, M. A., & Shelton, J. T. (2013). The dynamic multiprocess framework: Evidence from prospective memory with contextual variability. Cognitive Psychology, 67, 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.07.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. E. (2003). The cost of remembering to remember in event-based prospective memory: Investigating the capacity demands of delayed intention performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 347–361.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. E., & Bayen, U. J. (2004). A multinomial model of event-based prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 756–777.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. E., Rogers, M. D. M., McVay, J. C., Lopez, J. A., & Loft, S. (2014). Investigating how implementation intentions improve non-focal prospective memory tasks. Consciousness and Cognition, 27, 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.05.003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Strickland, L., Heathcote, A., Remington, R. W., & Loft, S. (2017). Accumulating evidence about what prospective memory costs actually reveal. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 1616–1629. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000400

  • Wagenmakers, E.-J., van der Maas, H. L. J., & Grasman, R. P. P. P. (2007). An EZ-diffusion model for response time and accuracy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, N. T., & Bayen, U. J. (2016). Selective effects of acute alcohol intake on the prospective and retrospective components of a prospective-memory task with emotional targets. Psychopharmacology, 233, 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-015-4110-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, S., & Meier, B. (2014). How important is importance for prospective memory? A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 657.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wesslein, A. K., Rummel, J., & Boywitt, C. D. (2014). Differential effects of cue specificity and list length on the prospective and retrospective prospective memory components. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26, 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2013.865628

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Yeshiva University, New York, NY, USA

    Anna-Lisa Cohen

  2. Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

    Jason L. Hicks

Authors
  1. Anna-Lisa Cohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jason L. Hicks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cohen, AL., Hicks, J.L. (2017). Characterization of Prospective Memory and Associated Processes. In: Prospective Memory. SpringerBriefs in Psychology(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68990-6_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation