prospective memory problems

Remembering to do things

Remembering intentions is more difficult than remembering past events

It's the lack of cues to remembering that make remembering intentions so difficult

That's why using physical objects to cue our remembering is so common

To remember intentions without relying on physical reminders, it's best to concentrate on working out an event or time that will trigger your remembering. Set your mind to remember the link between the trigger and the intention, not the intention on its own.

Planning memory contains your plans and goals (such as, “I must pick up the dry-cleaning today”; “I intend to finish this project within three months”). Forgetting an appointment or a promise is one of the memory problems people get most upset about.

Why remembering to do things is so difficult

Remembering intentions is in fact much more difficult than remembering events that have happened, and the primary reason is the lack of retrieval cues. This is why, of all memory tasks, remembering to do things relies most heavily on external memory aids. Reminder notes, calendars, diaries, watch-alarms, oven-timers, leaving objects in conspicuous places — all these external aids are acting as cues to memory.

In partial compensation for the paucity of effective retrieval cues , planning memories are more easily triggered by quite marginal cues. Thus a friend of mine was reminded that her son’s friend would be spending Saturday night with them when she saw an advertisement for a movie about John F. Kennedy (the child’s father had the same initials: JFK).

Setting up effective cues

When we form an intention, we usually link it either to an event (“after we go to the swimming-pool, we’ll go to the supermarket”) or a time (“at 2pm I must ring Fred”). But these trigger eventsor times frequently fail to remind us of our intention.

This is often because the trigger is not in itself particularly distinctive. Your failure to remember to ring Fred at 2pm, for example, may be because you paid little attention to the clock reaching that time, or because there were other competing activities triggered by that same time signal.

Moreover, not all planning is linked to a trigger event or time. Quite a lot of planning simply waits upon an appropriate opportunity (“must buy some stamps sometime”). Such intentions usually need quite explicit cues. Thus, if I happened to see stamps on sale, I would probably remember my intention, but walking past, or even into, a shop that happens to sell stamps, may not be enough to trigger my memory.

On the other hand, I might keep being reminded of my intention when I am in the same context as when I originally formed the intention (when I am not in a position to carry it out!) — hence your increasing exasperation that you can never remember a particular intention when you can do anything about it.

Link the trigger and the intention

To deal with opportunistic planning, you should try to specify features of an appropriate opportunity. Thus, to remember to buy bread on the way home, you should think about what actions you need to take to buy the bread (for example, going a different route) and try to form a strong link between the trigger event and your action (“today when I get to the traffic lights I’ll turn left”).

A reminder of your intention is much less effective than being reminded of both the trigger event and the intended activity. Even being reminded of the trigger event is better than being reminded of the intention on its own.

To remind yourself to do something, focus on the trigger not the intent itself.

Don’t assume that because something is important to you, you will automatically remember it — somewhat to their surprise, researchers have found no evidence that personal importance has any effect on the likelihood of remembering to do something.

You can read more about planning memory strategies in my ebook on planning memory.

You can read a free extract (pdf).

I have also extracted the 20-item questionnaire about performance on remembering particular types of intention, designed to help you get a better idea of your present performance on intention memory tasks, and to establish those specific tasks you most wish to improve. The quiz is in printable format.

References: 
  • Guynn, M.J., McDaniel, M.A. & Einstein, G.O. 1998. Prospective memory: When reminders fail. Memory & Cognition, 26, 287-298.
  • Morris, P.E. 1992. Prospective memory: remembering to do things. In M.M. Gruneberg, & P. Morris (eds.) Aspects of memory. Vol.1: The practical aspects. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

Checklists dramatically reduce errors in operating room crises

A simulated study of life-threatening surgical crises has found that using a checklist reduced the omission of critical steps from 23% to 6%.

I reported recently on how easily and quickly we can get derailed from a chain of thought (or action). In similar vein, here’s another study that shows how easy it is to omit important steps in an emergency, even when you’re an expert — which is why I’m a great fan of checklists.

Checklists have been shown to dramatically decrease the chances of an error, in areas such as flying and medicine. However, while surgeons may use checklists as a matter of routine (a study a few years ago found that the use of routine checklists before surgery substantially reduced the chances of a serious complication — we can hope that everyone’s now on board with that!), there’s a widespread belief in medicine that operating room crises are too complex for a checklist to be useful. A new study contradicts that belief.

The study involved 17 operating room teams (anesthesia staff, operating room nurses, surgical technologists, a surgeon), who participated in 106 simulated surgical crisis scenarios in a simulated operating room. Each team was randomized to manage half of the scenarios with a set of crisis checklists and the remaining scenarios from memory alone.

When checklists were used, the teams were 74% less likely to miss critical steps. That is, without a checklist, nearly a quarter (23%) of the steps were omitted (an alarming figure!), while with a checklist, only 6% of the steps were omitted on average. Every team performed better when the checklists were available.

After experiencing these situations, almost all (97%) participants said they would want these checklists used if they experienced such a crisis if they were a patient.

It’s comforting to know that airline pilots do have checklists to use in emergency situations. Now we must hope that hospitals come on board with this as well (up-to-date checklists and implementation materials can be found at www.projectcheck.org/crisis).

For the rest of us, the study serves as a reminder that, however practiced we may think we are, forgetting steps in an action plan is only too common, and checklists are an excellent means of dealing with this — in emergency and out.

Reference: 

[3262] Arriaga, A. F., Bader A. M., Wong J. M., Lipsitz S. R., Berry W. R., Ziewacz J. E., et al. (2013).  Simulation-Based Trial of Surgical-Crisis Checklists. New England Journal of Medicine. 368(3), 246 - 253.

Even tiny interruptions can double or treble work errors

A new study quantifies the degree to which tasks that involve actions in a precise sequence are vulnerable to interruptions.

In my book on remembering intentions, I spoke of how quickly and easily your thoughts can be derailed, leading to ‘action slips’ and, in the wrong circumstances, catastrophic mistakes. A new study shows how a 3-second interruption while doing a task doubled the rate of sequence errors, while a 4s one tripled it.

The study involved 300 people, who were asked to perform a series of ordered steps on the computer. The steps had to be performed in a specific sequence, mnemonically encapsulated by UNRAVEL, with each letter identifying the step. The task rules for each step differed, requiring the participant to mentally shift gears each time. Moreover, task elements could have multiple elements — for example, the letter U could signal the step, one of two possible responses for that step, or be a stimulus requiring a specific response when the step was N. Each step required the participant to choose between two possible responses based on one stimulus feature — features included whether it was a letter or a digit, whether it was underlined or italic, whether it was red or yellow, whether the character outside the outline box was above or below. There were also more cognitive features, such as whether the letter was near the beginning of the alphabet or not. The identifying mnemonic for the step was linked to the possible responses (e.g., N step – near or far; U step — underline or italic).

At various points, participants were very briefly interrupted. In the first experiment, they were asked to type four characters (letters or digits); in the second experiment, they were asked to type only two (a very brief interruption indeed!).

All of this was designed to set up a situation emulating “train of thought” operations, where correct performance depends on remembering where you are in the sequence, and on producing a situation where performance would have reasonably high proportion of errors — one of the problems with this type of research has been the use of routine tasks that are generally performed with a high degree of accuracy, thus generating only small amounts of error data for analysis.

In both experiments, interruptions significantly increased the rate of sequence errors on the first trial after the interruption (but not on subsequent ones). Nonsequence errors were not affected. In the first experiment (four-character interruption), the sequence error rate on the first trial after the interruption was 5.8%, compared to 1.8% on subsequent trials. In the second experiment (two-character interruption), it was 4.3%.

The four-character interruptions lasted an average of 4.36s, and the two-character interruptions lasted an average of 2.76s.

Whether the characters being typed were letters or digits made no difference, suggesting that the disruptive effects of interruptions are not overly sensitive to what’s being processed during the interruption (although of course these are not wildly different processes!).

The absence of effect on nonsequence errors shows that interruptions aren’t disrupting global attentional resources, but more specifically the placekeeping task.

As I discussed in my book, the step also made a significant difference — for sequence errors, middle steps showed higher error rates than end steps.

All of this confirms and quantifies how little it takes to derail us, and reminds us that, when engaged in tasks involving the precise sequence of sub-tasks (which so many tasks do), we need to be alert to the dangers of interruptions. This is, of course, particularly true for those working in life-critical areas, such as medicine.

Reference: 

[3207] Altmann, E. M., Gregory J., & Hambrick D. Z. (2013).  Momentary Interruptions Can Derail the Train of Thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. No - Pagination Specified.

Menopause forgetfulness greatest early in postmenopause

A smallish study suggests that the cognitive effects of menopause are greatest in the first year after menopause.

Being a woman of a certain age, I generally take notice of research into the effects of menopause on cognition. A new study adds weight, perhaps, to the idea that cognitive complaints in perimenopause and menopause are not directly a consequence of hormonal changes, but more particularly, shows that early post menopause may be the most problematic time.

The study followed 117 women from four stages of life: late reproductive, early and late menopausal transition, and early postmenopause. The late reproductive period is defined as when women first begin to notice subtle changes in their menstrual periods, but still have regular menstrual cycles. Women in the transitional stage (which can last for several years) experience fluctuation in menstrual cycles, and hormone levels begin to fluctuate significantly.

Women in the early stage of post menopause (first year after menopause), as a group, were found to perform more poorly on measures of verbal learning, verbal memory, and fine motor skill than women in the late reproductive and late transition stages. They also performed significantly worse than women in the late menopausal transition stage on attention/working memory tasks.

Surprisingly, self-reported symptoms such as sleep difficulties, depression, and anxiety did not predict memory problems. Neither were the problems correlated with hormone levels (although fluctuations could be a factor).

This seemingly contradicts earlier findings from the same researchers, who in a slightly smaller study found that those experiencing poorer working memory and attention were more likely to have poorer sleep, depression, and anxiety. That study, however, only involved women approaching and in menopause. Moreover, these aspects were not included in the abstract of the paper but only in the press release, and because I don’t have access to this particular journal, I cannot say whether there is something in the data that explains this. Because of this, I am not inclined to put too much weight on this point.

But we may perhaps take the findings as support for the view that cognitive problems experienced earlier in the menopause cycle are, when they occur, not a direct result of hormonal changes.

The important result of this study is the finding that the cognitive problems often experienced by women in their 40s and 50s are most acute during the early period of post menopause, and the indication that the causes and manifestations are different at different stages of menopause.

It should be noted, however, that there were only 14 women in the early postmenopause stage. So, we shouldn’t put too much weight on any of this. Nevertheless, it does add to the picture research is building up about the effects of menopause on women’s cognition.

While the researchers said that this effect is probably temporary — which was picked up as the headline in most media — this was not in fact investigated in this study. It would be nice to have some comparison with those, say, two or three and five years post menopause (but quite possibly this will be reported in a later paper).

Reference: 

[3237] Weber, M. T., Rubin L. H., & Maki P. M. (2013).  Cognition in perimenopause. Menopause: The Journal of The North American Menopause Society.

Smartphone training helps people with serious memory impairment regain independence

A smartphone training program, specifically designed for those with moderate-to-severe memory impairment, was found to significantly improve day-to-day functioning in a small study.

While smartphones and other digital assistants have been found to help people with mild memory impairment, their use by those with greater impairment has been less successful. However, a training program developed at the Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care has been using the power of implicit memory to help impaired individuals master new skills.

The study involved 10 outpatients, aged 18 to 55 (average age 44), who had moderate-to-severe memory impairment, the result of non-neurodegenerative conditions including ruptured aneurysm, stroke, tumor, epilepsy, closed-head injury, or anoxia after a heart attack. They all reported difficulty in day-to-day functioning.

Participants were trained in the basic functions of either a smartphone or another personal digital assistant (PDA) device, using an errorless training method that tapped into their preserved implicit /procedural memory. In this method, cues are progressively faded in such a way as to ensure there is enough information to prompt the correct response. The fading of the cues was based on the trainer’s observation of the patient’s behavior.

Participants were given several one-hour training sessions to learn calendaring skills such as inputting appointments and reminders. Each application was broken down into its component steps, and each step was given its own score in terms of how much support was needed. Support could either comprise a full explanation and demonstration; full explanation plus pointing to the next step; simply pointing to the next step; simply confirming a correct query; no support. The hour-long sessions occurred twice a week (with one exception, who only received one session a week). Training continued until the individual reached criterion-level performance (98% correct over a single session). On average, this took about 8 sessions, but as a general rule, those with relatively focal impairment tended to be substantially quicker than those with more extensive cognitive impairment.

After this first training phase, participants took their devices home, where they extended their use of the device through new applications mastered using the same protocol. These new tasks were carefully scaffolded to enable progressively more difficult tasks to be learned.

To assess performance, participants were given a schedule of 10 phone calls to complete over a two-week period at different times of the day. Additionally, family members kept a log of whether real-life tasks were successfully completed or not, and both participants and family members completed several questionnaires: one rating a list of common memory mistakes on a frequency-of-occurrence scale, another measuring confidence in dealing with various memory-demanding scenarios, and a third examining the participant's ability to use the device.

All 10 individuals showed improvement in day-to-day memory functioning after taking the training, and this improvement continued when the patients were followed up three to eight months later. Specifically, prospective memory (memory for future events) improved, and patient confidence in dealing with memory-demanding situations increased. Some patients also reported broadening their use of their device to include non-prospective memory tasks (e.g. entering names and/or photos of new acquaintances, or entering details of conversations).

It should be noted that these patients were some time past their injury, which was on average some 3 ½ years earlier (ranging from 10 months to over 25 years). Accordingly, they had all been through standard rehabilitation training, and already used many memory strategies. Questioning about strategy use prior to the training revealed that six participants used more memory strategies than they had before their injury, three hadn’t changed their strategy use, and one used fewer. Strategies included: calendars, lists, reminders from others, notebooks, day planner, placing items in prominent places, writing a note, relying on routines, alarms, organizing information, saying something out loud in order to remember it, mental elaboration, concentrating hard, mental retracing, computer software, spaced repetition, creating acronyms, alphabetic retrieval search.

The purpose of this small study, which built on an earlier study involving only two patients, was to demonstrate the generalizability of the training method to a larger number of individuals with moderate-to-severe memory impairment. Hopefully, it will also reassure such individuals, who tend not to use electronic memory aids, that these are a useful tool that they can, with the right training, learn to use successfully.

Walking through doorways causes forgetting

A series of experiments indicates that walking through doorways creates event boundaries, requiring us to update our awareness of current events and making information about the previous location less available.

We’re all familiar with the experience of going to another room and forgetting why we’ve done so. The problem has been largely attributed to a failure of attention, but recent research suggests something rather more specific is going on.

In a previous study, a virtual environment was used to explore what happens when people move through several rooms. The virtual environment was displayed on a very large (66 inch) screen to provide a more immersive experience. Each ‘room’ had one or two tables. Participants ‘carried’ an object, which they would deposit on a table, before picking up a different object. At various points, they were asked if the object was, say, a red cube (memory probe). The objects were not visible at the time of questioning. It was found that people were slower and less accurate if they had just moved to a new room.

To assess whether this effect depends on a high degree of immersion, a recent follow-up to this study replicated the study using standard 17” monitors rather than the giant screens. The experiment involved 55 students and once again demonstrated a significant effect of shifting rooms. Specifically, when the probe was positive, the error rate was 19% in the shift condition compared to 12% on trials when the participant ‘traveled’ the same distance but didn’t change rooms. When the probe was negative, the error rate was 22% in the shift condition vs 7% for the non-shift condition. Reaction time was less affected — there was no difference when the probes were positive, but a marginally significant difference on negative-probe trials.

The second experiment went to the other extreme. Rather than reducing the immersive experience, researchers increased it — to a real-world environment. Unlike the virtual environments, distances couldn’t be kept constant across conditions. Three large rooms were used, and no-shift trials involved different tables at opposite ends of the room. Six objects, rather than just one, were moved on each trial. Sixty students participated.

Once again, more errors occurred when a room-shift was involved. On positive-probe trials, the error rate was 28% in the shift condition vs 23% in the non-shift. On negative-probe trials, the error rate was 21% and 18%, respectively. The difference in reaction times wasn’t significant.

The third experiment, involving 48 students, tested the idea that forgetting might be due to the difference in context at retrieval compared to encoding. To do this, the researchers went back to using the more immersive virtual environment (the 66” screen), and included a third condition. In this, either the participant returned to the original room to be tested (return) or continued on to a new room to be tested (double-shift) — the idea being to hold the number of spatial shifts the same.

There was no evidence that returning to the original room produced the sort of advantage expected if context-matching was the important variable. Memory was best in the no-shift condition, next best in the shift and return conditions (no difference between them), and worst in the double shift condition. In other words, it was the number of new rooms entered that appears to be important.

This is in keeping with the idea that we break the action stream into separate events using event boundaries. Passing through a doorway is one type of event boundary. A more obvious type is the completion of an action sequence (e.g., mixing a cake — the boundary is the action of putting it in the oven; speaking on the phone — the boundary is the action of ending the call). Information being processed during an event is more available, foregrounded in your attention. Interference occurs when two or more events are activated, increasing errors and sometimes slowing retrieval.

All of this has greater ramifications than simply helping to explain why we so often go to another room and forget why we’re there. The broader point is that everything that happens to us is broken up and filed, and we should look for the boundaries to these events and be aware of the consequences of them for our memory. Moreover, these contextual factors are important elements of our filing system, and we can use that knowledge to construct more effective tags.

Reference: 

[2660] Radvansky, G. A., Krawietz S. A., & Tamplin A. K. (2011).  Walking Through Doorways Causes Forgetting: Further Explorations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.

News Topic aging - specific failures

Older news items (pre-2010) brought over from the old website

More evidence the aging brain is easily distracted

Here’s another study demonstrating that older adults aren't able to filter out distracting information as well as younger adults. The imaging study compared face recognition performance in younger adults (average age 26) and older (average age 70). It was found that, for both groups, difficulties encoding a new face were marked by decreased activity in the hippocampus. But older brains also showed increased activation in the auditory cortex, left prefrontal cortex and medial parietal cortex, showing that they were processing too much irrelevant information from their external environment – the notoriously loud noise of the scanner. Apart from confirming the distractibility of the older brain, the finding also raises questions about imaging studies in general, for older adults. It’s likely that older adults’ cognitive performance have been systematically underestimated.

[520] Stevens, D. W., Hasher L., Chiew K. S., & Grady C. L. (2008).  A Neural Mechanism Underlying Memory Failure in Older Adults. J. Neurosci.. 28(48), 12820 - 12824.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-11/bcfg-sfm112408.php

Age-related memory loss tied to slip in filtering information quickly

Increasing research in recent years has concluded that one of the problems for the aging brain is a diminished ability to ignore irrelevant information. In fact, many believe it is the major problem for the healthy aging brain. Others believe, more traditionally, that the main problem is a decline in processing speed. A new study shows that both of these happen — in tandem. The difficulty in suppressing irrelevant information occurs because the processing of that irrelevant information has slowed down. This slowdown, at least in visual memory, seems to occur only in the first 200 milliseconds of visual processing, and the difficulty in suppressing irrelevant information occurs only during this period. This suppression failure is thought to impact on working memory.

[553] Gazzaley, A., Clapp W., Kelley J., McEvoy K., Knight R. T., & D'Esposito M. (2008).  Age-related top-down suppression deficit in the early stages of cortical visual memory processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105(35), 13122 - 13126.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-09/uoc--aml090208.php

More on why older adults are more distractible

A number of recent studies have made it clear that as we age, we find it harder to block out unwanted distractions. A new study used a new brain imaging technique known as EROS to determine whether this is due to faster sensory memory decay or to inefficient filtering of irrelevant sensory information. The study involved 16 young and 16 older participants who read a book of their choice while distracting tones played in the background. The volume of the tones was adjusted so that all the participants heard them at the same level, and the tones were emitted in groups of fives. The young participants showed brain activity in the auditory cortex in response to the first tone in each sequence only, but the older adults' brains responded to all five. The finding supports the view that the growing difficulty at blocking out distractions is due to inefficient filtering of irrelevant sensory information , not faster sensory memory decay.

[1380] Fabiani, M., Low K. A., Wee E., Sable J. J., & Gratton G. (2006).  Reduced Suppression or Labile Memory? Mechanisms of Inefficient Filtering of Irrelevant Information in Older Adults. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 18(4), 637 - 650.

http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.htm3?article_id=218392783

Why older adults more vulnerable to distraction from irrelevant information

We know older adults find it harder to filter out irrelevant information. Now a study looking at brain function in young, middle-aged and older adults has identified changes in brain activity that begin gradually in middle age which may explain why. In younger adults, activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (associated with tasks that require concentration, such as reading) normally increases during the task, while activity in the medial frontal and parietal regions (associated with non-task related activity in a resting state, such as thinking about yourself, what you did last night, monitoring what's going on around you) normally decreases. In middle age (40-60 years), this pattern begins to break down during performance of memory tasks, although performance is not affected (but most of the participants were fairly well educated, so the finding of brain changes without accompanying behavioural changes in the middle-aged group may reflect the "protective effect" of education). Activity in the medial frontal and parietal regions stays turned on while activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex decreases. The imbalance becomes more pronounced in older adults (65+), suggesting there is a gradual, age-related reduction in the ability to suspend non-task-related or "default-mode" activity and engage areas for carrying out memory tasks.

[759] Grady, C. L., Springer M. V., Hongwanishkul D., McIntosh A. R., & Winocur G. (2006).  Age-related Changes in Brain Activity across the Adult Lifespan. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 18(2), 227 - 241.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/b-oam013006.php

Changes in brain, not age, determine one's ability to focus on task

It’s been established that one of the reasons why older adults may do less well on cognitive tasks is because they have greater difficulty in ignoring distractions, which impairs their concentration. But not all older people are afflicted by this. Some are as focused as young adults. An imaging study has now revealed a difference between the brains of those people who are good at focusing, and those who are poor. Those who have difficulty screening out distractions have less white matter in the frontal lobes. They activated neurons in the left frontal lobe as well as the right. Young people and high-functioning older adults tended to use only the right frontal lobe.

[1117] Colcombe, S. J., Kramer A. F., Erickson K. I., & Scalf P. (2005).  The implications of cortical recruitment and brain morphology for individual differences in inhibitory function in aging humans. Psychology and Aging. 20(3), 363 - 375.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-10/uoia-cib102605.php

Memory loss in older adults due to distractions, not inability to focus

We know that older adults often have short-term memory problems, and this has been linked to problems with attention. An imaging study now provides evidence that these short-term memory problems are associated with an inability to filter out surrounding distractions, rather than problems with focusing attention. It’s been suggested that an inability to ignore distracting information may indeed be at the heart of many of the cognitive problems that accompany aging. It should be noted that this is not an inevitable effect of age — in the study, 6 of the 16 older adults involved had no problems with short-term memory or attention.

[383] Gazzaley, A., Cooney J. W., Rissman J., & D'Esposito M. (2005).  Top-down suppression deficit underlies working memory impairment in normal aging. Nat Neurosci. 8(10), 1298 - 1300.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-09/uoc--mli090805.php

Older news items (pre-2010) brought over from the old website

Older adults more likely to "remember" misinformation

In a study involving older adults (average age 75) and younger adults (average age 19), participants studied lists of paired related words, then viewed new lists of paired words, some the same as before, some different, and some with only one of the two words the same. In those cases, the "prime" word, which was presented immediately prior to the test, was plausible but incorrect. The older adults were 10 times more likely than young adults to accept the wrong word and falsely "remember" earlier studying that word. This was true even though older adults had more time to study the list of word pairs and attained a performance level equal to that of the young adults. Additionally, when told they had the option to "pass" when unsure of an answer, older adults rarely used the option. Younger adults did, greatly reducing their false recall. The findings reflect real-world reports of a rising incidence of scams perpetrated on the elderly, which rely on the victim’s poor memory and vulnerability to the power of suggestion.

[629] Jacoby, L. L., Bishara A. J., Hessels S., & Toth J. P. (2005).  Aging, subjective experience, and cognitive control: dramatic false remembering by older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 134(2), 131 - 148.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-05/apa-gmc051005.php

Repeated product warnings are remembered as product recommendations

Warnings about particular products may have quite the opposite effect than intended. Because we retain a familiarity with encountered items far longer than details, the more often we are told a claim about a consumer item is false, the more likely we are to accept it as true a little further down the track. Research also reveals that older adults are more susceptible to this error. It is relevant to note that in the U.S. at least, some 80% of consumer fraud victims are over 65.

[489] Skurnik, I., Yoon C., Park D. C., & Schwarz N. (2005).  How Warnings about False Claims Become Recommendations. Journal of Consumer Research. 31(4), 713 - 724.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-03/uocp-nrr032905.php

Source-memory problems not an inevitable consequence of aging, but a function of frontal-lobe efficiency

Source memory is memory for the broad contextual aspects surrounding an event, such as who was speaking, or whether you learned something from a book or TV. Previous research has found that it is in this aspect of memory that older people tend to be particularly poor. In a study that compared older individuals with undergraduates, it was found that those who performed above average on frontal-lobe tests, showed no significant impairment of source memory, regardless of age. Those with below-average performance, tended to have impaired source memory (as a group). In other words, source-memory problems are not an inevitable consequence of aging, as has been widely thought, but rather are a function of frontal-lobe efficiency. The proportion of older adults who experience frontal-lobe decline, at what ages, and to what degree, is unknown at this time.
What’s more, when researchers required people to consider the relation between an item and its context (source), age differences in memory performance completely disappeared, suggesting older adults can learn strategies to remember the context better.

[626] Glisky, E. L., Rubin S. R., & Davidson P. S. R. (2001).  Source Memory in Older Adults: An Encoding or Retrieval Problem?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 27(5), 1131 - 1146.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-09/apa-ada083101.php

Older news items (pre-2010) brought over from the old website

Genetic cause for word-finding disease

Primary Progressive Aphasia is a little-known form of dementia in which people lose the ability to express themselves and understand speech. People can begin to show symptoms of PPA as early as in their 40's and 50's. A new study has found has discovered a gene mutation in two unrelated families in which nearly all the siblings suffered from PPA. The mutations were not observed in the healthy siblings or in more than 200 controls.

[1164] Hutton, M. L., Graff-Radford N. R., Mesulam M. Marsel, Johnson N., Krefft T. A., Gass J. M., et al. (2007).  Progranulin Mutations in Primary Progressive Aphasia: The PPA1 and PPA3 Families. Arch Neurol. 64(1), 43 - 47.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-01/nu-rdg011507.php

Word substitution mistakes have more to do with speech planning than with thought or attention problems

Why is it that we can look at something, know what it is and still call it by the wrong name? A new study suggests that the problem doesn’t lie in haste or a lack of attention, but rather in a fault in speech planning.

Griffin, Z.M. 2004. The eyes are right when the mouth is wrong. Psychological Science, 15 (12), 814-820.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-12/aps-sot120804.php

What causes word finding failures in young and older adults

Old news section4: 

Older news items (pre-2010) brought over from the old website

Older people with the 'Alzheimer's gene' find it harder to remember intentions

It has been established that those with a certain allele of a gene called ApoE have a much greater risk of developing Alzheimer’s (those with this allele on both genes have 8 times the risk; those with the allele on one gene have 3 times the risk). Recent studies also suggest that such carriers are also more likely to show signs of deficits in episodic memory – but that these deficits are quite subtle. In the first study to look at prospective memory in seniors with the “Alzheimer’s gene”, involving 32 healthy, dementia-free adults between ages of 60 and 87, researchers found a marked difference in performance between those who had the allele and those who did not. The results suggest an exception to the thinking that ApoE status has only a subtle effect on cognition.

[1276] Driscoll, I., McDaniel M. A., & Guynn M. J. (2005).  Apolipoprotein E and prospective memory in normally aging adults. Neuropsychology. 19(1), 28 - 34.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-01/apa-opw011805.php

'Imagination' helps older people remember to comply with medical advice

A new study suggests a way to help older people remember to take medications and follow other medical advice. Researchers found older adults (aged 60 to 81) who spent a few minutes picturing how they would test their blood sugar were 50% more likely to actually do these tests on a regular basis than those who used other memory techniques. Participants were assigned to one of three groups. One group spent one 3-minute session visualizing exactly what they would be doing and where they would be the next day when they were scheduled to test their blood sugar levels. Another group repeatedly recited aloud the instructions for testing their blood. The last group were asked to write a list of pros and cons for testing blood sugar. All participants were asked not to use timers, alarms or other devices. Over 3 weeks, the “imagination” group remembered 76% of the time to test their blood sugar at the right times of the day compared to an average of 46% in the other two groups. They were also far less likely to go an entire day without testing than those in the other two groups.

[473] Liu, L. L., & Park D. C. (2004).  Aging and medical adherence: the use of automatic processes to achieve effortful things. Psychology and Aging. 19(2), 318 - 325.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-06/nioa-ho060104.php

Old news section5: 

Older news items (pre-2010) brought over from the old website

Old news section6: 

Older news items (pre-2010) brought over from the old website

Whether couple’s collaborative dialogue helps spouse's memory

A small study suggests that middle-aged couples are more likely to be effective than older couples in helping fill in each other’s memory gaps, but effective collaboration also depends on conversational style.

In my book on remembering what you’re doing and what you intend to do, I briefly discuss the popular strategy of asking someone to remind you (basically, whether it’s an effective strategy depends on several factors, of which the most important is the reliability of the person doing the reminding). So I was interested to see a pilot study investigating the use of this strategy between couples.

The study confirms earlier findings that the extent to which this strategy is effective depends on how reliable the partner's memory is, but expands on that by tying it to age and conversational style.

The study involved 11 married couples, of whom five were middle-aged (average age 52), and six were older adults (average age 73). Participants completed a range of prospective memory tasks by playing the board game "Virtual Week," which encourages verbal interaction among players about completing real life tasks. For each virtual "day" in the game, participants were asked to perform 10 different prospective memory tasks — four that regularly occur (eg, taking medication with breakfast), four that were different each day (eg, purchasing gasoline for the car), and two being time-check tasks that were not based on the activities of the board game (eg, check lung capacity at two specified times).

Overall, the middle-aged group benefited more from collaboration than the older group. But it was also found that those couples who performed best were those who were more supportive and encouraging of each other.

Collaboration in memory tasks is an interesting activity, because it can be both helpful and hindering. Think about how memory works — by association. You start from some point, and if you’re on a good track, more and more should be revealed as each memory triggers another. If another person keeps interrupting your train, you can be derailed. On the other hand, they might help you fill you in gaps that you need, or even point you to the right track, if you’re on the wrong one.

In this small study, it tended to be the middle-aged couples that filled in the gaps more effectively than the older couples. That probably has a lot to do with memory reliability. So it’s not a big surprise (though useful to be aware of). But what I find more interesting (because it’s less obvious, and more importantly, because it’s more under our control) is this idea that our conversational style affects whether memory collaboration is useful or counterproductive. I look forward to results from a larger study.

Reference: 

[2490] Margrett, J. A., Reese-Melancon C., & Rendell P. G. (2011).  Examining Collaborative Dialogue Among Couples. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology. 219, 100 - 107.

Helping older adults remember whether they’ve done something

Older adults are more likely to forget that they've done something. A new study has found that doing something unusual (such as putting a hand on their head) at the same time helps seniors remember having done the task.

Previous research has shown that older adults are more likely to incorrectly repeat an action in situations where a prospective memory task has become habitual — for example, taking more medication because they’ve forgotten they’ve already taken it. A new study has found that doing something unusual at the same time helps seniors remember having done the task. In the study, older adults told to put a hand on their heads whenever they made a particular response, reduced the level of repetition errors to that of younger adults. It’s suggested that doing something unusual, like knocking on wood or patting yourself on the head, while taking a daily dose of medicine may be an effective strategy to help seniors remember whether they've already taken their daily medications.

Recreational drugs associated with deficits in planning memory

A small study has found that regular use ecstasy or cocaine is associated with impaired prospective memory (remembering things you plan to do).

A study involving 42 students who were ecstasy/polydrug users has found that ecstasy, or the regular use of several drugs, affects users' prospective memory (remembering things you plan to do), even when tests are controlled for cannabis, tobacco or alcohol use. Cocaine use in particular was prominently associated with prospective memory impairment. Deficits were evident in both lab-based and self-reported measurements.

Reference: 

[164] Hadjiefthyvoulou, F., Fisk J. E., Montgomery C., & Bridges N. J. (2010).  Everyday and prospective memory deficits in ecstasy/polydrug users. J Psychopharmacol. 0269881109359101 - 0269881109359101.

Full text is available for a limited time at http://jop.sagepub.com/cgi/rapidpdf/0269881109359101v1

Syndicate content