Planning Processes and Age in the Five-disc Tower of London Task

Gilhooly, K. J.; Phillips, Louise H.; Wynn, V.; Logie, Robert H.; Sala, S Della

doi:10.1080/135467899393977

Cited by 58 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While this may reduce the requirement for planning prior to the first move, it does not eliminate on-line planning -participants generally do not move balls at random but must select moves that somehow transform the current state towards the final goal state. Consistent with Gilhooly et al (1999), we suggest that participants focus on different subgoals (e.g., first get the red ball in place) during the course of each trial, and plan for these subgoals, both prior to their first move and during the course of the trial.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Set-shifting as a component process of goal-directed problem-solving

Cooper

Marsh

2015

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In two experiments, we compared secondary task interference on Tower of London performance resulting from three different secondary tasks. The secondary tasks were designed to tap three different executive functions, namely set-shifting, memory monitoring and updating, and response inhibition. Previous work using individual differences methodology suggests that, all other things being equal, the response inhibition or memory tasks should result in the greatest interference. However, this was not found to be the case. Rather, in both experiments the setshifting task resulted in significantly more interference on Tower of London performance than either of the other secondary tasks. Subsequent analyses suggest that the degree of interference could not be attributed to differences in secondary task difficulty. Results are interpreted in the light of related work which suggests that solving problems with non-transparent goal/subgoal structure requires flexible shifting between subgoals -a process that is held to be impaired by concurrent performance of a set-shifting task.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

“…To solve the problem one might first ask: Which ball should be moved first (cf. Gilhooly et al, 1999)? Thus, one immediately considers three possible subgoals (move red to target position, move green to target position, or move blue to target position).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Set-shifting as a component process of goal-directed problem-solving

Cooper

Marsh

2015

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gilhooly, Phillips, Wynn, Logie, and Della Sala (1999) found that during performance of the Tower of London task, older adults were more prone to errors and incomplete reasoning during the planning stage than during the stage in which the moves are completed. The authors argue that the planning stage relies more heavily on working memory processes than does the move stage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relational Integration, Inhibition, and Analogical Reasoning in Older Adults.

Viskontas¹,

Morrison²,

Holyoak³

et al. 2004

Psychology and Aging

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The difficulty of reasoning tasks depends on their relational complexity, which increases with the number of relations that must be considered simultaneously to make an inference, and on the number of irrelevant items that must be inhibited. The authors examined the ability of younger and older adults to integrate multiple relations and inhibit irrelevant stimuli. Young adults performed well at all but the highest level of relational complexity, whereas older adults performed poorly even at a medium level of relational complexity, especially when irrelevant information was presented. Simulations based on a neurocomputational model of analogical reasoning, Learning and Inference with Schemas and Analogies (LISA), suggest that the observed decline in reasoning performance may be explained by a decline in attention and inhibitory functions in older adults.Human reasoning depends in part on the ability to integrate multiple relations and inhibit irrelevant information. For example, if Bill is taller than Carl and Abe is taller than Bill, one must integrate the two "taller than" relations to make the inference that Abe is taller than Carl. A relational analysis of reasoning provides a framework that makes it possible to define levels of complexity for particular reasoning tasks. According to Halford (1998;Halford & Wilson, 1980;Halford, Wilson, & Phillips, 1998), the processing load for any step in a task is determined by the number of dimensions, or relations, that must be processed simultaneously to make the decisions required for that step. Dimensions are viewed as analogous to degrees of freedom, or the number of independent sources of variation. At the first level of complexity (Level 1), the reasoner needs to consider only one relation to solve the task correctly.1 At Level 2, the reasoner must integrate two relations, and so on. For example, it is necessary to integrate two relations to correctly solve the transitive inference problem described previously.More generally, we define relational complexity as the number of relations that a reasoner must simultaneously "hold in mind" to generate the solution. This framework makes it possible to study the processing demands of complex reasoning and to better characterize changes in reasoning ability that occur during normal aging. Although it is known that reasoning ability declines with age (for reviews, see Salthouse, 1992aSalthouse, , 2005, the underlying mechanisms of this decline are not well established. In the current study, we investigate the effects of age on the ability to solve a complex analogical reasoning problem and consider possible algorithmic reasons for the observed decline with age.The ability to hold in mind multiple relations relies on working memory capacity. (See Morrison, 2005, for a review of the role of working memory in reasoning.) Miller (1956) originally postulated that the processing capacity of what is now called working memory is seven plus or minus two "chunks," which are independent units of information. This estimate has since bee...

show abstract

“…in our study some old adults said when they orally reported their plan''…and the rest of the tasks will sort themselves out…''). Moreover, there is evidence that old adults may be impaired in verbalising their plans (Gilhooly et al 1999). Using the Tower of London, Gilhooly and colleagues asked participants to think aloud while planning how to move the discs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, planning shows age-related declines, especially for novel and more complex tasks (e.g. Andrés and van der Linden 2000;Gilhooly et al 1999; for an overview see Phillips et al 2005); but deficits have also been reported for more realistic planning tasks (e.g. Garden et al 2001;Kliegel et al 2007;Phillips et al 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the age-prospective memory-paradox: the role of planning and task experience

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed at investigating agerelated differences in prospective memory performance using a paradigm with high ecological validity and experimental control. Thirty old and 30 young adults completed the Dresden Breakfast task; a meal preparation task in the lab that comprises several subtasks including event-and time-based prospective memory tasks. Participants were required to plan how to perform the task. Results showed that young adults outperformed old adults: they completed more subtasks, showed better event-and time-based prospective memory performance and planning quality. In contrast, old adults adhered to their plans more closely than young adults. Further exploratory gender-specific analyses indicated that old women did not differ from young men in time-based prospective memory performance, general task performance and time monitoring in contrast to old men. Possibly, differences in experience in breakfast preparation might account for these differential findings.

show abstract

Planning Processes and Age in the Five-disc Tower of London Task

Cited by 58 publications

References 32 publications

Set-shifting as a component process of goal-directed problem-solving

Set-shifting as a component process of goal-directed problem-solving

Relational Integration, Inhibition, and Analogical Reasoning in Older Adults.

Revisiting the age-prospective memory-paradox: the role of planning and task experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About