Prospective memory reminders: A laboratory investigation of initiation source and age effects
Open accessAbstract
Prior research indicates that, in some circumstances, reminders may facilitate prospective remembering. However, it remains unclear whether this effect is dependent on the initiation source (self vs. external), whether it is moderated by task type (event vs. time based), or whether the provision of standardized reminders particularly benefits older adults. In the current study, young ( n = 48) and older adults ( n = 47) were tested on a laboratory-based prospective memory task in which they encountered three counterbalanced reminder conditions: no reminders, self-initiated reminders, and experimenter-initiated reminders. The results indicated that while the provision of reminders enhanced prospective memory performance, no difference was seen between self-initiated and experimenter-initiated reminder conditions, nor was there any interaction with age or prospective memory type (event vs. time based). These data support the role of both self- and externally generated external reminders as an aid to prospective remembering. However, the absence of any interaction with age is not consistent with theoretical models of ageing that consider the provision of such reminders to reduce strategic demands (or increase automatic processing).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The literature on delayed intentions has rarely examined the ways that people manipulate the environment themselves to create perceptual triggers.
“While some studies have investigated the efficacy of experimenter-provided reminders (Guynn, McDaniel, & Einstein, 1998; Henry, Rendell, Phillips, Dunlop, & Kliegel, 2012; Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara, 2011; Vortac, Edwards, & Manning, 1995), the literature on delayed intentions has rarely examined the ways that we manipulate the environment ourselves to create perceptual triggers.”
From Strategic offloading of delayed intentions into the external environment (2015) · cites this paper as Henry, Rendell, Phillips, Dunlop, & Kliegel, 2012
Cites
Maylor, E. A. (1990) · The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A · doi:10.1080/14640749008401233 · Cited by 228 · see citing works
Prospective memory: When reminders fail
Guynn, M. J., Mcdaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (1998) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03201140 · Cited by 168 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strategic offloading of delayed intentions into the external environment
Gilbert, S. J. (2015) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.972963 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Outsourcing Memory to External Tools: A Review of ‘Intention Offloading’
Gilbert, S. J., Boldt, A., Sachdeva, C., Scarampi, C., & Tsai, P.-C. (2023) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-022-02139-4 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
- Authors
- Henry, J. D., Rendell, P. G., Phillips, L. H., Dunlop, L., & Kliegel, M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Australian Catholic University (AU)
- University of Aberdeen (GB)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- University of Geneva (CH)
- Venue
- Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-07
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1274-1287
- ISSN
- 0033-555X (ISSN-L)
- 1747-0218
- 1747-0226
- OpenAlex
- W2062669782
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4
- FWCI
- 5.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- prospective memory, reminders, age effects, older adults, event-based prospective memory, time-based prospective memory, aging, automatic processing
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Analysis of Variance, Cues, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Photic Stimulation, Mental Recall, User-Computer Interface, Intention, Young Adult, 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