DMCA
Control of Cost in Prospective Memory: Evidence for Spontaneous Retrieval Processes
| Citations: | 7 - 3 self |
BibTeX
@MISC{Scullin_controlof,
author = {Michael K. Scullin and Mark A. Mcdaniel and Gilles O. Einstein and Michael K. Scullin and Mark A. Mcdaniel and Department Of Psychology},
title = {Control of Cost in Prospective Memory: Evidence for Spontaneous Retrieval Processes},
year = {}
}
Share
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
OpenURL
Abstract
To examine the processes that support prospective remembering, previous research has often examined whether the presence of a prospective memory task slows overall responding on an ongoing task. Although slowed task performance suggests that monitoring is present, this method does not clearly establish whether monitoring is functionally related to prospective memory performance. According to the multiprocess theory (McDaniel & Einstein, 2000), monitoring should be necessary to prospective memory performance with nonfocal cues but not with focal cues. To test this hypothesis, we varied monitoring by presenting items that were related (or unrelated) to the prospective memory task proximal to target events. Notably, whereas monitoring proximal to target events led to a large increase in nonfocal prospective memory performance, focal prospective remembering was high in the absence of monitoring, and monitoring in this condition provided no additional benefits. These results suggest that when monitoring is absent, spontaneous retrieval processes can support focal prospective remembering.
Keyphrases
spontaneous retrieval process prospective memory prospective memory performance focal prospective remembering additional benefit slowed task performance focal cue prospective memory task ongoing task prospective remembering nonfocal cue nonfocal prospective memory performance previous research prospective memory task proximal mcdaniel einstein large increase multiprocess theory
