Differential effects of cue specificity and list length on the prospective and retrospective prospective-memory components

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 135-146

  Wesslein, A K ^a   Rummel, Jan ^b   Boywitt, C Dennis ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TRIER   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

False prospective memory responses; Multinomial model of event based prospective memory; Number of cues; Prospective memory; Specificity of cues

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; COGNITIVE BIAS; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MENTAL PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE MEMORY; RECOGNITION; RETROSPECTIVE MEMORY; STATISTICAL MODEL; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORD LIST RECALL; ACCURACY; NORMAL HUMAN; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EID: 84894024941     PISSN: 20445911     EISSN: 2044592X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/20445911.2013.865628     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Albinski, R., Sedek, G., & Kliegel, M. (2012). Differences in target monitoring in a prospective memory task. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 916-928. doi:10.1080/20445911.2012.717923
2. Bugelski, B. R. (1962). Presentation time, total time, and mediation in paired associate learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 409-412. doi:10. 1037/h0045665
3. Cohen, A.-L., Dixon, R. A., Lindsay, D. S., & Masson, M. E. J. (2003). The effect of perceptual distinctiveness on the prospective and retrospective components of prospective memory in young and old adults. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 274-289. doi:10.1037/h0087431 (Pubitemid 37524455)
4. Cohen, A.-L., Jaudas, A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2008). Number of cues influences the cost of remembering to remember. Memory & Cognition, 36, 149-156. doi:10.3758/MC.36.1.149 (Pubitemid 351927948)
5. Cohen, A.-L., West, R., & Craik, F. I. M. (2001). Modulation of the prospective and retrospective components of memory for intentions in younger and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 8, 1-13. doi:10.1076/anec.8.1.1.845 (Pubitemid 32499851)
6. Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (1996). Retrieval processes in prospective memory: Theoretical approaches and some new empirical findings. In M. Brandimonte, G. O. Einstein, & M. A. McDaniel (Eds.), Prospective memory: Theory and applications. (pp. 115-141). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Thomas, R., Mayfield, S., Shank, H., Morrisette, N., & Breneiser, J. (2005). Multiple processes in prospective memory retrieval: Factors determining monitoring versus spontaneous retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 327-342. doi:10.1037/0096- 3445.134.3.327 (Pubitemid 41323152)
8. Ellis, J., & Milne, A. (1996). Retrieval cue specificity and the realization of delayed intentions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 49, 862-887. doi:10.1080/027249896392333
9. Guynn, M. J., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). Target preexposure eliminates the effect of distraction on event-based prospective memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 484-488. doi:10.3758/BF03194094
10. Horn, S. S., Bayen, U. J., Smith, R. E., & Boywitt, C. D. (2011). The multinomial model of prospective memory: Validity of ongoing-task parameters. Experimental Psychology, 58, 247-255. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000091
11. Kliegel, M., Guynn, M. J., & Zimmer, H. (2007). The role of noticing in prospective memory forgetting. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 64, 226-232. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.09.007 (Pubitemid 46783064)
12. Knight, J. B., Meeks, J. T., Marsh, R. L., Cook, G. I., Brewer, G. A., & Hicks, J. L. (2011). An observation on the spontaneous noticing of prospective memory event-based cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 298-307. doi:10.1037/a0021969
13. 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. doi:10. 1037/0278-7393.29.5.861 (Pubitemid 37268931)
14. Meier, B., & Rey-Mermet, A. (2012). Beyond monitoring: After-effects of responding to prospective memory targets. Consciousness & Cognition, 21, 1644-1653. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2012.09.003
15. Meiser, T., & Rummel, J. (2012). False prospective memory responses as indications of automatic processes in the initiation of delayed intentions. Consciousness & Cognition, 21, 1509-1516. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2012.05.006
16. Moshagen, M. (2010). multiTree: A computer program for the analysis of multinomial processing tree models. Behavior Research Methods, 42(1), 42-54. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.1.42
17. Rummel, J. (2010). Psychological distance to a prospective memory cue influences the probability of fulfilling a delayed intention. Memory, 18, 284-292. doi:10.10 80/09658211003601514
18. 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. doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.586708
19. Rummel, J., Einstein, G. O., & Rampey, H. (2012). Implementation-intention encoding in a prospective memory task enhances spontaneous retrieval of intentions. Memory, 20, 803-817. doi:10.1080/096582 11.09652012.09707214
20. 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. doi:10.1037/a0025021
21. 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. doi:10.3758/MC.37. 4.425
22. 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. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.30. 4.756 (Pubitemid 38845997)
23. Spaniol, J., & Bayen, U. J. (2002). When is schematic knowledge used in source monitoring? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 631-651. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.631
24. Strong, E. K., Jr. (1912). The effect of length of series upon recognition memory. Psychological Review, 19, 447-462. doi:10.1037/h0069812