The Importance of Source and Cue Type in Time-Based Everyday Prospective Memory

Abstract

We examined the effects of the source of a prospective memory task (provided or generated) and the type of cue (specific or general) triggering that task in everyday settings. Participants were asked to complete both generated and experimenter-provided tasks and to send a text message when each task was completed. The cue/context for the to-be-completed tasks was either a specific time or a general deadline (time-based cue), and the cue/context for the texting task was the completion of the task itself (activity-based cue). Although generated tasks were completed more often, generated cues/contexts were no more effective than provided ones in triggering the intention. Furthermore, generated tasks were completed more often when the cue/context comprised a specific time, whereas provided tasks were completed more often when the cue/context comprised a general deadline. However, texting was unaffected by the source of the cue/context. Finally, emotion modulated the effects. Results are discussed within a process-driven framework.

Predictors of everyday prospective memory performance: A superiority in the execution of event-based tasks over time-based tasks reverses in real-life situations.

“…Such long intervals offer opportunities for natural, repeated breaks between ongoing activities that can be used for checking the clock relatively effortlessly, and these breaks foster better PM performance (d’Ydewalle et al, 1999; Hicks et al, 2000). Furthermore, in long time intervals, the passage of a certain amount of time may be signaled by external events, and the moments when different ongoing activities begin and end (Oates & Peynircioğlu, 2014).…”