Motivational Influences on Controlled Processing: Moderating Distractibility in Older Adults

Germain, Cassandra M.; Hess, Thomas M.

doi:10.1080/13825580600611302

Cited by 45 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This possibility should be farther explored in future research. It is worth noting, however, that although there is no other reasonable explanation for the results of our study, there is clear inconsistency between our suggestion that old age is associated with a decrease of EFNC and that of other studies that demonstrate that older adults use schematic processing more consistently with their epistemic needs than do their younger counter parts (for review, see Germain & Hess, 2007). However, it can be claimed that the difference between our results and those reported by Hess and colleagues is explained by the different level of analysis utilized by us and them.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

The relationship between need for closure and memory for schema-related information among younger and older adults

Kossowska

Jaśko

Bar‐Tal

et al. 2012

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies were conducted to examine the relationships among need for closure (NFC) and schematic information processing in younger and older adults. The results show increased NFC to be associated with less schematic processing (i.e., less memory for schema-consistent items, and more memory for schema-irrelevant items, out of all items memorized correctly), among older than younger adults. The findings of the studies are interpreted as demonstrating the age-associated deficit in information processing consistent with the level of NFC. Moreover, the results indicate that positive mood may play a role in facilitating information processing consistent with the level of NFC among older and younger adults. Finally, we present a framework for predicting when older adults will and will not effectively use schematic processing, considered a compensatory strategy for decline in cognitive abilities.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 62%

The relationship between need for closure and memory for schema-related information among younger and older adults

Kossowska

Jaśko

Bar‐Tal

et al. 2012

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the past era-specific pairings, it may be that older adults were consumed by the past objects and failed to adequately associate the prices, or that older adults did not have sufficient experience purchasing these items. This could also occur because the common items have a high degree of familiarity, frequency of purchase, or personal relevance (see also Germain & Hess, 2007), causing older adults to attend to the objects and bind the prices effectively. For the past era-specific items, older adults were perhaps relying on a form of remote schematic support for both the item and the prices, leading to some level of familiarity, but one that is more “faded” and does not lead to effective binding of the item price.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Back to the future: Past and future era-based schematic support and associative memory for prices in younger and older adults.

Castel¹,

McGillivray²,

Worden³

2013

Psychology and Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Older adults typically display various associative memory deficits, but these deficits can be reduced when conditions allow for the use of prior knowledge or schematic support. To determine how era-specific schematic support and future simulation might influence associative memory, we examined how younger and older adults remember prices from the past as well as the future. Younger and older adults were asked to imagine the past or future, and then studied items and prices from approximately 40 years ago (market value prices from the 1970s) or 40 years in the future. In Experiment 1, all items were common items (e.g., movie ticket, coffee) and the associated prices reflected the era in question, whereas in Experiment 2, some item-price pairs were specific to the time period (e.g., typewriter, robot maid), to test different degrees of schematic support. After studying the pairs, participants were shown each item and asked to recall the associated price. In both experiments, older adults showed similar performance as younger adults in the past condition for the common items, whereas age-related differences were greater in the future condition and for the era-specific items. The findings suggest that in order for schematic support to be effective, recent (and not simply remote) experience is needed in order to enhance memory. Thus, whereas older adults can benefit from “turning back the clock,” younger adults better remember future-oriented information compared with older adults, outlining age-related similarities and differences in associative memory and the efficient use of past and future-based schematic support.

show abstract

“…A common approach in this tradition is to assess cognitive task selection and engagement as a function of the motivational value associated with that task (see, e.g., Freund, 2006; Germain & Hess, 2007). …”

Section: Motivational Definitions and Operationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanisms of motivation–cognition interaction: challenges and opportunities

Braver

Krug

Chiew

et al. 2014

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

Self Cite

320

252

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent years have seen a rejuvenation of interest in studies of motivation–cognition interactions arising from many different areas of psychology and neuroscience. The present issue of Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience provides a sampling of some of the latest research from a number of these different areas. In this introductory article, we provide an overview of the current state of the field, in terms of key research developments and candidate neural mechanisms receiving focused investigation as potential sources of motivation–cognition interaction. However, our primary goal is conceptual: to highlight the distinct perspectives taken by different research areas, in terms of how motivation is defined, the relevant dimensions and dissociations that are emphasized, and the theoretical questions being targeted. Together, these distinctions present both challenges and opportunities for efforts aiming toward a more unified and cross-disciplinary approach. We identify a set of pressing research questions calling for this sort of cross-disciplinary approach, with the explicit goal of encouraging integrative and collaborative investigations directed toward them.

show abstract

Motivational Influences on Controlled Processing: Moderating Distractibility in Older Adults

Cited by 45 publications

References 24 publications

The relationship between need for closure and memory for schema-related information among younger and older adults

The relationship between need for closure and memory for schema-related information among younger and older adults

Back to the future: Past and future era-based schematic support and associative memory for prices in younger and older adults.

Mechanisms of motivation–cognition interaction: challenges and opportunities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About