The present study investigates how individuals distribute their attentional resources between a prospective memory task and an ongoing task. Therefore, metacognitive expectations about the attentional demands of the prospective-memory task were manipulated while the factual demands were held constant. In Experiments 1a and 1b, we found attentional costs from a prospective-memory task with low factual demands to be significantly reduced when information about the low to-be-expected demands were provided, while prospective-memory performance remained largely unaffected. In Experiment 2, attentional monitoring in (...) a more demanding prospective-memory task also varied with information about the to-be-expected demands and again there were no equivalent changes in prospective-memory performance. These findings suggest that attention–allocation strategies of prospective memory rely on metacognitive expectations about prospective-memory task demands. Furthermore, the results suggest that attentional monitoring is only functional for prospective memory to the extent to which anticipated task demands reflect objective task demands. (shrink)

To investigate whether making performance predictions affects prospective memory processing, we asked one group of participants to predict their performance in a PM task embedded in an ongoing task and compared their performance with a control group that made no predictions. A third group gave not only PM predictions but also ongoing-task predictions. Exclusive PM predictions resulted in slower ongoing-task responding both in a nonfocal and in a focal PM task. Only in the nonfocal task was the additional slowing accompanied (...) by improved PM performance. Even in the nonfocal task, however, was the correlation between ongoing-task speed and PM performance reduced after predictions, suggesting that the slowing was not completely functional for PM. Prediction-induced changes could be avoided by asking participants to additionally predict their performance in the ongoing task. In sum, the present findings substantiate a role of metamemory for attention-allocation strategies of PM. (shrink)

Event-based prospective memory refers to remembering to execute planned actions in response to a target ProM cues. Encoding modality influences ProM performance; visual encoding has been studied more than auditory encoding. Further, it has not yet been examined whether different encoding may influence ProM performance in different encoding modalities. This study examines the effects of encoding modality, cue-encoding specificity, and encoding modes on event-based ProM tasks. In Experiment 1, cue specificity and encoding modality were manipulated as a within-groups encoding of (...) visual cues is more commonly and between-groups variable. Results revealed the facilitative effect of cue specificity on ProM performance. Also, with respect to encoding modality, participants showed better performance when receiving auditory instructions compared with the visual encoding condition. In Experiment 2, as in Experiment 1, cue specificity and encoding modality were manipulated. Encoding mode was added as a new between-group variable. Result revealed that there was a significant interaction between encoding modality and encoding modes. Visual implementation intention encoding was a more effective method for improving ProM performance compared with visual standard encoding. Furthermore, there was a significant interaction between cue-encoding specificity and encoding modes. Implementation intention encoding enhances ProM performance in non-specific cue-encoding conditions. Overall, the present study found that auditory encoding modality showed superior ProM performance compared with visual encoding, although implementation intention had facilitative on ProM performance regardless of the encoding modalities, and there was better ProM performance under specific encoding compared with non-specific encoding, and implementation intention had a facilitative effect on ProM performance in the non-specific condition. (shrink)

To analyze the role of automatic processes in the fulfilment of delayed intentions, we extended a typical prospective memory setting with a context signal to indicate whether the intended action is to be carried out or not. Building on dual-process models of cognition, we hypothesized that automatic and controlled processes are in opposition when the action is to be suppressed, because automatic processes trigger the associated response whereas controlled processes exert inhibition. Experiment 1 demonstrates the occurrence of false prospective memory (...) responses to cues with the “suppress” signal. Experiment 2 shows that the rate of false prospective memory responses is sensitive to a manipulation that strengthens the role of automatic processes in prospective memory. The findings support the use of false prospective memory responses for the study of automatic processes in the execution of delayed intentions. (shrink)