Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T03:13:13.958Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The age-prospective memory-paradox: an exploration of possible mechanisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2010

Katharina M. Schnitzspahn ,
Andreas Ihle ,
Julie D. Henry ,
Peter G. Rendell  and
Matthias Kliegel
Katharina M. Schnitzspahn*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
Andreas Ihle
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
Julie D. Henry
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Peter G. Rendell
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia
Matthias Kliegel
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Katharina Schnitzspahn, Department of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, D-01062 Dresden, Germany. Phone: +49 (0)351 463-32065; Fax: +49 (0)351 463-37294. Email: schnitzspahn@psychologie.tu-dresden.de.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: The age-prospective memory-paradox describes the general pattern of age-related deficits in laboratory-based prospective memory tasks and age-related benefits in naturalistic tasks that are carried out in participants' everyday lives. However, the mechanisms which are critical in determining the direction of age effects remain poorly delineated.

Method: Twenty young and 20 old adults performed a laboratory and a naturalistic prospective memory task, which were similar in structure and demand. Several factors highlighted in recent theoretical models as potentially important to understanding the paradox (motivation, metacognitive awareness, activity absorption, control over the task) were assessed and their contribution to the age paradox empirically explored.

Results: First, analyzing mean level age differences, the paradox was confirmed. Second, exploring possible correlates of the paradox revealed that, while low levels of daily activity absorption, high motivation and good metacognitive awareness were associated with age benefits in prospective memory performance in the naturalistic task, high ongoing activity absorption and low control over the prospective memory cue seem important for understanding age deficits in lab-based tasks.

Conclusion: The current study confirms the age-prospective memory-paradox within one sample and with carefully matched laboratory and naturalistic tasks. Additionally, it takes an important step forward in clarifying the role of different factors in understanding age effects across these different contexts. The results indicate that the relative importance of different factors vary as a function of assessment context, with conceptual as well as applied implications.

Keywords

prospective memoryageinglaboratory tasknaturalistic task
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , May 2011 , pp. 583 - 592
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aberle, I., Rendell, P. G., Rose, N. S., McDaniel, M. A. and Kliegel, M. (in press). The age prospective memory paradox: young adults may not give their best outside of the lab. Developmental Psychology.Google Scholar
Almeida, D. M. and Horn, M. C. (2004). Is daily life more stressful during middle adulthood? In Brim, O. G., Ryff, C. D. and Kessler, R. C. (eds.), How Healthy Are We? A National Study of Well-being at Midlife. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, P. E., Henry, J. D., Rendell, P. G., Phillips, L. H. and Kliegel, M. (2010). Dismantling the “age-prospective memory paradox”: the classic laboratory paradigm simulated in a naturalistic setting. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 646–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockburn, J. (1996). Assessment and treatment of prospective memory deficits. In Brandimonte, M., Einstein, G. O. and McDaniel, M. A. (eds.), Prospective Memory: Theory and Applications (pp. 327–350). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
d'Ydewalle, G. and Brunfaut, E. (1996). Are older subjects necessarily worse in prospective memory tasks? In Georgas, M., Manthouli, E., Besevegis, E. and Kokkevi, A. (eds.), Contemporary Psychology in Europe: Theory, Research and Applications (pp. 161–172). Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe and Huber.Google Scholar
Einstein, G. O. and McDaniel, M. A. (1990). Normal aging and prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 717–726.Google ScholarPubMed
Ellis, J. (1996). Prospective memory or the realization of delayed intentions: A conceptual framework for research. In Brandimonte, M., Einstein, G. O. and McDaniel, M. A., (eds.), Prospective Memory: Theory and Applications (pp. 1–22). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. and Kvavilashvili, L. (2000). Prospective memory in 2000: past, present, and future directions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, S1–S9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, J. D., MacLeod, M. S., Phillips, L. H. and Crawford, J. R. (2004). A metaanalytic review of prospective memory and aging. Psychology and Aging, 19, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huppert, F. A., Johnson, T. and Nickson, J. (2000). High prevalence of prospective memory impairment in the elderly and in early-stage dementia: findings from a population based study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, S63–S81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. L., Bogers, H. and Kerstholt, J. (1988). Do memory aids aid the elderly in their day to day remembering? In Gruneberg, M. M., Morris, P. and Sykes, R. N. (eds.), Practical Aspects of Memory: Current Research and Issues (pp. 137–142). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kliegel, M., Jäger, T., Phillips, L.H., Federspiel, E., Imfeld, A., Keller, M. and Zimprich, D. (2005). Effects of sad mood on time-based prospective memory. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 1199–1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kliegel, M., Martin, M., McDaniel, M. A. and Phillips, L. H. (2007). Adult age differences in errand planning: the role of task familiarity and cognitive resources. Experimental Aging Research, 33, 145–161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kliegel, M., MacKinlay, R. and Jäger, T. (2008). A life span approach to the development of complex prospective memory. In Kliegel, M., McDaniel, M. A. and Einstein, G. O. (eds.), Prospective Memory: Cognitive, Neuroscience, Developmental, and Applied Perspectives. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kvavilashvili, L. (1987). Remembering intentions as a distinct form of memory. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 507–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehrl, S. (1977). Der Mehrfachwahlwortschatztest MWT-B. Erlangen: Straube.Google Scholar
Martin, M., and Kliegel, M. (2003). The development of complex prospective memory performance in childhood. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 35, 75–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maylor, E. A. (1990). Age and prospective memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 42A, 471–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maylor, E. A. (1993). Aging and forgetting in prospective and retrospective memory tasks. Psychology and Aging, 8, 420–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDaniel, M. A. and Einstein, G. O. (2000). Strategic and automatic processes in prospective memory retrieval: a multiprocess framework. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, S127–S144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O. and Jacoby, L. L. (2008). New considerations in aging and memory: the glass may be half full. In Craik, F. I. M. and Salthouse, T. A. (eds.), The Handbook of Aging and Cognition. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Moscovitch, M. (1982). A neuropsychological approach to memory and perception in normal and pathological aging. In Craik, F. I. M. and Trehub, S. (eds.), Aging and Cognitive Processes (pp. 55–78). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, T. O. and Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people's judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: the “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science, 2, 267–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, D. C., Hertzog, C., Kidder, D. P., Morrell, R. W. and Mayhorn, C. B. (1997). Effect of age on event-based and time-based prospective memory. Psychology and Aging, 12, 314–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patton, G. W. and Meit, M. (1993). Effect of aging on prospective and incidental memory. Experimental Aging Research, 19, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, L. H., Henry, J. D. and Martin, M. (2008). Adult aging and prospective memory: the importance of ecological validity. In Kliegel, M., McDaniel, M. A. and Einstein, G. O. (eds.), Prospective Memory: Cognitive, Neuroscience, Developmental, and Applied Perspectives. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rendell, P. G. and Craik, F. I. M. (2000). Virtual week and actual week: age-related differences in prospective memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, S43–S62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rendell, P. G. and Thomson, D. M. (1999). Aging and prospective memory: differences between naturalistic and laboratory tasks. The Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 54B, 256–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roozendaal, B., McEwen, B. S. and Chattarji, S. (2009). Stress, memory and the amygdala. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10, 423–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sliwinski, M. J., Smyth, J., Hofer, S. M. and Stawski, R. S. (2006). Intra-individual coupling of daily stress and cognition. Psychology and Aging, 21, 545–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M. and Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrugt, A. and Oort, F. J. (2008). Metacognition, achievement goals, study strategies and academic achievement: pathways to achievement. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 123–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1981). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Revised. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Will, C. M., Rendell, P. G., Ozgis, S., Pierson, J. M., Ong, B. and Henry, J. D. (2009). Cognitively impaired older adults exhibit comparable difficulties on naturalistic and laboratory prospective memory tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 804–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeintl, M., Kliegel, M. and Hofer, S.M. (2007). The role of processing resources in age-related prospective and retrospective memory within old age. Psychology and Aging, 22, 826–834.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed