Cited by 539Cognitive Functions and MemoryMemory Processes and InfluencesPsychological and Temporal Perspectives Research

A taxonomy of prospection: Introducing an organizational framework for future-oriented cognition

Open access
Szpunar, Karl K., Spreng, R. Nathan, Schacter, Daniel L.·2014·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Prospection—the ability to represent what might happen in the future—is a broad concept that has been used to characterize a wide variety of future-oriented cognitions, including affective forecasting, prospective memory, temporal discounting, episodic simulation, and autobiographical planning. In this article, we propose a taxonomy of prospection to initiate the important and necessary process of teasing apart the various forms of future thinking that constitute the landscape of prospective cognition. The organizational framework that we propose delineates episodic and semantic forms of four modes of future thinking: simulation, prediction, intention, and planning. We show how this framework can be used to draw attention to the ways in which various modes of future thinking interact with one another, generate new questions about prospective cognition, and illuminate our understanding of disorders of future thinking. We conclude by considering basic cognitive processes that give rise to prospective cognitions, cognitive operations and emotional/motivational states relevant to future-oriented cognition, and the possible role of procedural or motor systems in future-oriented behavior.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1417144111

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Szpunar, K. K., Spreng, R. N., & Schacter, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2014-11-21
Volume
111
Issue
52
Pages
18414-18421
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1999520675
Cited by
539
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 22
FWCI
3.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ag008441-30)
  • National Institute on Aging (R01-AG008441, AG 08441, R37AG008441)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH 60941, R01MH060941)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychological and Temporal Perspectives Research
Keywords
prospection, future-oriented cognition, episodic simulation, prediction, intention, planning, affective forecasting, prospective memory, delay discounting, procedural systems
MeSH terms
Cognition, Humans, Thinking, Memory, Episodic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review