Age, testing at preferred or nonpreferred times (testing optimality), and false memory.

Abstract

Two experiments investigated whether age and testing at preferred (optimal) times of day or nonpreferred (nonoptimal) times affected the ability to select relevant from irrelevant but thematically related alternatives in a verbal false memory paradigm. A 3rd experiment pursued the same issues with a visual false memory paradigm. In all 3 experiments, younger adults (n = 195) correctly recalled studied items more often than older adults (n = 121), whereas the 2 age groups correctly recognized about the same numbers of previously studied items. In all 3 experiments, nonoptimally tested older adults had more difficulty excluding nonstudied but thematically related items than the other groups; thus, they showed the greatest evidence of false memory, although all groups did so to a significant extent. The results suggest that optimality and its circadian determinants need to be considered with some tasks for the elderly. Various models and mechanisms are discussed.

Effect of the time-of-day of training on explicit memory

“…The subjects who acquired information in the afternoon performed better, even though one-third of the sample consisted of subjects classified as morning types. A plausible explanation for this result is that most studies that show an interaction between chronotype and cognitive task time-of-day applied memory tests with a short interval between training and the test (13)(14)(15). Perhaps, previously consolidated Data are reported as mean ± SEM of performance (hits minus errors).…”

“…The subjects of these studies were mostly young, a population with a greater tendency to being afternoon types (13,14). In this case, it could be suggested that the better performance of individuals who trained in the afternoon was a result of a synchronic effect and not related to training time-of-day (13)(14)(15).…”

“…Studies that used memory tasks with a short retention interval have shown a so-called synchronic effect, which consists of better performance when subjects of a determinant chronotype perform the task at their optimal time-ofday (13)(14)(15)(16)). An important implication of these chronotype studies is that perhaps the training time-of-day effect on long-term explicit memory reported by Folkard et al (4) may have been, in fact, a consequence of the sample that was used.…”

The effects of associations and aging on illusory recollection

“…Jacoby, 1999). However, it is important to note that age differences in absolute levels of false recognition are not always obtained in the DRM paradigm, at least under standard conditions (see, e.g., Benjamin, 2001;Budson, Daffner, Desikan, & Schacter, 2000;Intons-Peterson, Rocchi, West, McLellan, & Hackney, 1999;Kensinger & Schacter, 1999). This outcome may indicate that monitoring processes are not necessarily impaired with aging, or that, under standard DRM conditions, having additional monitoring resources available does not necessarily help younger adults reduce false recognition.…”

Illusory Recollection: The Compelling Subjective Remembrance of Things that Never Happened. Insights from the DRM Paradigm

“…Indeed, compared to younger adults, similar rates of illusory recollection and similar length effects on source judgements and MCQ ratings have been observed in older adults (Gallo & Roediger, 2003; see also Meade & Roediger, 2006). In contrast, some studies have shown increased false recollection in older adults, particularly if they were tested under forced recall conditions (Meade & Roediger, 2006), with repeated testing conditions (Skinner & Fernandes, 2009), or at their non-optimal time of the day (Intons-Peterson, Rocchi, West, McClellan, & Hackney, 1999). Similarly, recent data using the think-out-loud procedure suggest that older adults might be more likely to report illusory recollection and misrecollect details associated with studied items to justify their "Remember" judgements compared to younger adults (Dehon & Lampinen, in preparation).…”