The transferability of time-based prospective memory training is easily affected by attention

Guo, Yunfei; Gan, Jiaqun

doi:10.1007/s12144-021-02509-6

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their behavior of pressing the 1 key would not cause the current letter to immediately disappear. They could press the space bar anytime they wanted to check the time (Guo & Gan, 2022; Guo et al, 2021). Each TBPM task lasted for 68 s. When the procedure exceeded 68 s, regardless of whether the participants performed the TBPM task, the procedure would pause at this time and the participants were asked to rest for 2 min.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The difference of time‐based prospective memory between Type A and Type B individuals under different time monitoring conditions

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Time‐based prospective memory (TBPM) is affected by many factors, which include Type A and Type B personality types. Type A individuals have a strong desire to complete tasks and a strong sense of time‐urgency to complete established tasks before the deadline. Type B individuals have fewer time constraints and usually procrastinate until the deadline to complete the task. Compared with Type B individuals, Type A individuals may perform better in TBPM due to their advantages in time cognition and attitude. This study explores the differences in the TBPM ability between Type A individuals and Type B individuals under different time monitoring conditions. In Experiment 1, there was no limit to how many times participants could check the time. The results showed that the performance of TBPM between Type A individuals and Type B individuals was not different. In Experiment 2, participants could only check the time once during each TBPM task. The results showed that, compared to Type B individuals, Type A individuals performed better in TBPM, with higher time monitoring frequency and slower response speed to the ongoing tasks. These findings suggest that the performance of Type A individuals in TBPM has an advantage only under the restricted time monitoring condition. This advantage is then mainly due to the increase in the attention consumption of Type A individuals in both internal and external attention.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The difference of time‐based prospective memory between Type A and Type B individuals under different time monitoring conditions

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prospective memory cues were G and R, both of which would appear twice in the experimental procedure. The one-back task was adopted as the ongoing task (Chen et al, 2017; Guo & Gan, 2022) where participants were asked to compare two adjacent letters and to press the F key if these two letters were different; otherwise, they were asked to press the J key. The baseline group only performed the ongoing task.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The processing mechanism of mixed prospective memory: Changes in internal and external attention

Gan

Guo

Wang

2023

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixed prospective memory (MPM) is a special form of prospective memory (PM) with both time and event clues. Depending on the classification of the time clue clarity, MPM can also be divided into time-period MPM and time-point MPM. MPM and TBPM may have different processing mechanisms due to the additional event clue, and it involves two aspects of attention: internal and external attention. Internal attention is indirectly reflected in ongoing task performance, while external attention is directly reflected in the frequency of checking the time. This study aimed to investigate whether there are differences in the processing mechanisms between TBPM and the two types of MPM. The current study examined the changes in internal and external attention for different types of MPM and TBPM under both free and restricted time monitoring conditions. The results showed that in terms of the PM performance, time-point MPM was the best, followed by time-period MPM, with TBPM as the worst. In the performance of ongoing tasks, the two types of MPM were better than TBPM in some stages but worse than the baseline. In addition, the two MPMs evoked a lower time monitoring frequency than TBPM under different monitoring conditions. These results suggest that, compared with TBPM, MPM reduces both internal and external attention consumption. Internal attention consumption displayed dynamic changes for both types of MPM, and the time-point MPM had higher internal attention effectiveness than the time-period MPM. The dynamic multiprocess theory is supported by these results.

show abstract

“…(1) Accuracy of TBPM. To measure TBPM accuracy, PM responses within 5 s before and after 1 min (55-65 s) were counted as correct performance of the TBPM task (Guo & Gan, 2022). ( 2 Measurements of the accuracy and time difference of TBPM were generated in the execution phase, while measurements of the accuracy and reaction time of ongoing tasks were generated in the maintenance phase.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(1) Accuracy of TBPM. To measure TBPM accuracy, PM responses within 5 s before and after 1 min (55–65 s) were counted as correct performance of the TBPM task (Guo & Gan, 2022). (2) Time difference of TBPM.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosocial motivation can promote the time‐based prospective memory of school‐age children

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In real life, we are often motivated to plan things to be performed at specific times in the future. Some of these intended actions help other individuals, and thus involve time‐based prospective memory (TBPM) under prosocial motivational conditions. Children's social development is very rapid, and they have relatively stable prosocial motivation during school age. Few studies have paid attention to this issue. This study focuses on three aspects of this issue: (1) the impact of prosocial motivation on the TBPM of school‐age children, (2) whether there are sex differences in this effect, and, for the first time, (3) the processing mechanism by which prosocial motivation affects TBPM in school‐age children in the framework of the motivation cognitive model. A total of 112 elementary school students, aged between 8 and 12, participated in the experiment, using a 2 (group: prosocial motivation, control) × 2 (sex: boy, girl) between‐subjects design. The results showed that prosocial motivation can significantly reduce children's time difference of TBPM. However, we found no sex differences in the effect of prosocial motivation on TBPM in the above two indicators. With regard to the processing mechanism, we found that the prosocial motivation group paid more attention to external time information throughout the experiment. However, their internal attention and the effectiveness of attention did not improve. These results partially support the motivation cognitive model. Overall, this study found that prosocial motivation relies mainly on external attention to improve the TBPM performance of school‐age children.

show abstract

The transferability of time-based prospective memory training is easily affected by attention

Cited by 5 publications

References 22 publications

The difference of time‐based prospective memory between Type A and Type B individuals under different time monitoring conditions

The difference of time‐based prospective memory between Type A and Type B individuals under different time monitoring conditions

The processing mechanism of mixed prospective memory: Changes in internal and external attention

Prosocial motivation can promote the time‐based prospective memory of school‐age children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About