The Dynamic Multiprocess Framework: Evidence from prospective memory with contextual variability

Abstract

The ability to remember to execute delayed intentions is referred to as prospective memory. Previous theoretical and empirical work has focused on isolating whether a particular prospective memory task is supported either by effortful monitoring processes or by cue-driven spontaneous processes. In the present work, we advance the Dynamic Multiprocess Framework, which contends that both monitoring and spontaneous retrieval may be utilized dynamically to support prospective remembering. To capture the dynamic interplay between monitoring and spontaneous retrieval we had participants perform many ongoing tasks and told them that their prospective memory cue may occur in any context. Following either a 20-min or a 12-hr retention interval, the prospective memory cues were presented infrequently across three separate ongoing tasks. The monitoring patterns (measured as ongoing task cost relative to a between-subjects control condition) were consistent and robust across the three contexts. There was no evidence for monitoring prior to the initial prospective memory cue; however, individuals who successfully spontaneously retrieved the prospective memory intention, thereby realizing that prospective memory cues could be expected within that context, subsequently monitored. These data support the Dynamic Multiprocess Framework, which contends that individuals will engage monitoring when prospective memory cues are expected, disengage monitoring when cues are not expected, and that when monitoring is disengaged, a probabilistic spontaneous retrieval mechanism can support prospective remembering.

Response dynamics in prospective memory

“…One debated question is the amount of attention required for successful PM. Previous work suggests that successful PM retrieval is supported by processes such as attentional monitoring (Smith, 2003), cue-driven spontaneous retrieval (Einstein & McDaniel, 2005), or a dynamic combination of both processes (Scullin, McDaniel, & Shelton, 2013). In the present study, we introduce a new method for examining the various processes potentially facilitating PM performance.…”

“…The MP view predicts monitoring during nonfocal PM tasks, and other types of processing such as spontaneous retrieval, during focal PM tasks. Although much work has advanced our current understanding of the contextual factors and processes that are associated with PM, there is still debate regarding when processes such as monitoring and spontaneous retrieval are utilized (Einstein & McDaniel, 2010;Smith, 2010, also see Scullin et al, 2013).…”

Prospective Memory in Older Adults: Where We Are Now and What Is Next

“…In this context, it is interesting to note that a recent variant of the multiprocess theory put forward by Scullin et al [24] seems to dovetail with the differential task approach observed in the above-mentioned data. In detail, Scullin et al have suggested that in principle both spontaneous retrieval and controlled processing may be utilized dynamically in one PM task.…”

Location-based prospective memory

“…Returning to the prospective memory literature, from this theoretical view most previous studies of event-based prospective memory have used individual stimuli as event cues, such as seeing a word on a screen (e.g., Einstein & McDaniel, 1990;Scullin, McDaniel, & Shelton, 2013) or hearing a recording of a dog bark (Knight, Nicholls, & Titov, 2008). For event cognition theory, these are only a component of events, namely, they are entities within an event.…”