Value-based routing of delayed intentions into brain-based versus external memory stores.

Abstract

Individuals have the option of remembering delayed intentions by storing them in internal memory or offloading them to an external store such as a diary or smartphone alert. How do we route intentions to the appropriate store, and what are the consequences of this? We report three experiments (two preregistered) investigating the role of value. In Experiment 1, participants preferentially offloaded high-value intentions to the external environment. This improved memory for both high-and low-value content. Experiment 2 replicated the low-value memory enhancement even when only high-value intentions were offloaded. This provides evidence for a cognitive spillover effect: When high-value content is offloaded, internal memory becomes reallocated to low-value content instead. Experiment 3 confirmed a theoretical prediction of this account: participants had superior memory for low-than high-value content when the external store was removed. These results imply that value-based offloading can lead to a cognitive spillover effect from high-to low-value content, similar to the automatic allocation of "spare" capacity that has been proposed in the domain of visual attention. Individuals prioritize high-value information for external memory; consequently, they can be left with predominantly low-value information if it fails.

Cognitive offloading is value-based decision making: Modelling cognitive effort and the expected value of memory

“…This follows the approach taken in other domains of cognition, such as the expected value of control model (Shenhav et al, 2013), according to which individuals balance the benefits against the costs of cognitive control. In the paradigm used by Dupont et al (2022), the rewards associated with remembering are explicitly defined in terms of financial payments (e.g. 7 cents for remembering high-value items; 3 cents for remembering low-value items).…”

“…This is based on the procedure of Dupont et al (2022, Experiment 3), in which 12 items were presented on screen at once, of which 25% were high-value targets and 25% were low-value targets. Dupont et al (2022) conducted two experiments where high-and low-value targets were worth 10 points and 1 point respectively, and a third experiment where they were worth 7 points and 3 points. An intermediate pair of values, 8 points versus 2 points, are used here so that the same parameters are used for all simulations.…”

“…Note that in a situation where the difference in value is more extreme (e.g. 10 points versus 1 point, as used by Dupont et al, 2022, Experiments 1-2), the optimal strategy is to encode high-value items only and to disregard low-value items, because the additional reward from encoding lowvalue items does not outweigh the reduced likelihood of remembering high-value items.…”

“…Many of the phenomena considered here are illustrated by a study by Dupont et al (2022). This serves as the basic paradigm to be simulated.…”

“…In other conditions participants had to rely on internal memory alone in order to remember the delayed intentions. Dupont et al (2022). Participants dragged numbered circles in sequential order to the bottom of the box, while additional circles appeared on the screen to continue to the sequence.…”