2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.02.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Frontal lobe involvement in a task of time-based prospective memory

Abstract: Time-based prospective memory (PM) has been found to be negatively affected by aging, possibly as a result of declining frontal lobe (FL) function. Despite a clear retrospective component to PM tasks, the medial temporal lobes (MTL) are thought to play only a secondary role in successful task completion. The present study investigated the role of the FLs and MTLs in time-based PM, as well as their involvement in clock monitoring, plan generation, and time estimation, each of which may play a role in the execut… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

26
101
0
9

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 105 publications
(136 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
26
101
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, this result qualifies the finding from McFarland and Glisky (2011) and is in line with their initial conceptual expectations. They assumed, based on former research, that cognitively high functioning participants in the control condition would have spontaneously developed more specific plans (McFarland and Glisky 2009) and created a stronger link between cue and intention (Glisky et al 1995(Glisky et al , 2001Glisky and Kong 2008) than did cognitively low functioning participants in the control condition. Given the different prospective memory tasks used in the study from McFarland and Glisky (2011) and in the current one, it is plausible to assume that it was easier to spontaneously develop specific plans and strong cue-action associations for high functioning participants in the control condition in the present study as participants exactly knew the environment and the general circumstances from the situation where they were going to execute the intended action.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, this result qualifies the finding from McFarland and Glisky (2011) and is in line with their initial conceptual expectations. They assumed, based on former research, that cognitively high functioning participants in the control condition would have spontaneously developed more specific plans (McFarland and Glisky 2009) and created a stronger link between cue and intention (Glisky et al 1995(Glisky et al , 2001Glisky and Kong 2008) than did cognitively low functioning participants in the control condition. Given the different prospective memory tasks used in the study from McFarland and Glisky (2011) and in the current one, it is plausible to assume that it was easier to spontaneously develop specific plans and strong cue-action associations for high functioning participants in the control condition in the present study as participants exactly knew the environment and the general circumstances from the situation where they were going to execute the intended action.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…at the occurrence of the critical event or time), they must stop performing the ongoing task and begin performing the intended action. Top-down attentional control, strategic monitoring of the external environment and/or of the time passing and shifting between concurring activities are all cognitive abilities under the control of the executive system (Knight 1998;Burgess and Shallice 1997;Carlesimo et al 2004;Marsh et al 1998;McDaniel et al 1999;McFarland and Glisky 2009;Otani et al 1997) (Fig. 1).…”
Section: Prospective Memory: a Definitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the target is event-based PM, a person performs an action when a specific event occurs (i.e., passing a message when your friend calls); while if the target is time-based PM, a person forms a self-generated intention to perform an action at a specific time in the future (i.e., remembering the appointment with a friend at 4:00 p.m.). Event-based PM tasks are considered to be less cognitively demanding than time-based PM tasks because they require less self-initiated retrieval with the event providing an intrinsic external cue to help recall the task to be performed (McDaniel & Einstein, 1993;McDaniel, Guynn, Glisky, & Routhieaux, 1999;McFarland & Glisky, 2009). PM relies on retrospective memory for learning and retaining the "content" of tasks to be remembered (i.e., "what"), but also involves executive functions (i.e., initiation, planning, monitoring, and inhibition of ongoing activities) (Groot, Wilson, Evans, & Watson, 2002;McDaniel et al, 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%