Event-Based Prospective Memory Is Resistant but Not Immune to Proactive Interference

Oates, Joyce M.; Peyni̇rci̇oğlu, Zehra F.

doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.129.4.0419

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Investigating such a model would likely require manipulation of the intervals among target presentations. Future research could also use the augmented PMDC model to account for the positive effects of PM context reinstatement (Smith & Skinner, 2019), or negative effects of proactive interference (Oates & Peynircioğlu, 2016), on prospective remembering. For example, regarding proactive interference, Cook et al (2006) found that PM targets that were associated with items in a previous experimental task reduced their effectiveness as cues in a subsequent PM task.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Target learning in event-based prospective memory.

Strickland¹,

Heathcote²,

Humphreys³

et al. 2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Event-based prospective memory (PM) tasks require individuals to remember to perform a previously planned action when they encounter a specific event. Often, the natural environments in which PM tasks occur are embedded are constantly changing, requiring humans to adapt by learning. We examine one such adaptation by integrating PM target learning with the Prospective Memory Decision Control (PMDC) cognitive model. We apply this augmented model to an experiment that manipulated exposure to PM targets, comparing a single-target PM condition where the target was well learned from the outset, to a multiple-target PM condition with less initial PM target exposure, allowing us to examine the effect of continued target learning opportunities. Single-target PM accuracy was near ceiling whereas multiple-target PM accuracy was initially poorer but improved throughout the course of the experiment. PM response times were longer for the multiplecompared to single-target PM task but this difference also decreased over time. The model indicated that PM trial evidence accumulation rates, and the inhibition of competing responses, were initially higher for single compared to multiple PM targets, but that this difference decreased over time due to the learning of multiple-targets over the target repetitions. These outcomes provide insight into how the processes underlying event-based PM can dynamically evolve over time, and a modelling framework to further investigate the effect of learning on event-based PM decision processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%