Executive control contributes little to prospective memory function in older age: evidence from more ecologically valid paradigms.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2024.2431672
Simon J Haines, Lucy Busija, Alexandra Hering, Gill Terrett, Skye McLennan, Yvonne Wells, Peter G Rendell, Julie D Henry
{"title":"Executive control contributes little to prospective memory function in older age: evidence from more ecologically valid paradigms.","authors":"Simon J Haines, Lucy Busija, Alexandra Hering, Gill Terrett, Skye McLennan, Yvonne Wells, Peter G Rendell, Julie D Henry","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2024.2431672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Age-related losses in executive control are widely assumed to contribute to prospective memory (PM) lapses in late adulthood, but to date, this assumption has gained only inconsistent support from lab-based studies. The present study tested whether age indirectly affects PM via (1) individual differences in specific executive control operations (a parallel mediated model), or (2) a serially mediated model, with processing speed as the first mediator. Older adults (<i>n </i>= 166) completed four measures of PM that had higher ecological validity than standard lab-based paradigms, as well as measures of executive function and other cognitive abilities. The results showed that, although age was a significant predictor of reduced performance on three of the PM measures, particularly time-based tasks, these negative age associations were only slightly diminished when executive functions were controlled for. Performance on the PM task with the greatest ecological validity (MEMO) was independent of age and measures of executive function but positively related to both learning and retention. Processing speed was a poor predictor of PM performance on all measures (accounting for between 0% and 4% of variance). Taken together, these results highlight the need for circumspection in generalising the role of executive control in age-related prospective memory performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2024.2431672","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Age-related losses in executive control are widely assumed to contribute to prospective memory (PM) lapses in late adulthood, but to date, this assumption has gained only inconsistent support from lab-based studies. The present study tested whether age indirectly affects PM via (1) individual differences in specific executive control operations (a parallel mediated model), or (2) a serially mediated model, with processing speed as the first mediator. Older adults (n = 166) completed four measures of PM that had higher ecological validity than standard lab-based paradigms, as well as measures of executive function and other cognitive abilities. The results showed that, although age was a significant predictor of reduced performance on three of the PM measures, particularly time-based tasks, these negative age associations were only slightly diminished when executive functions were controlled for. Performance on the PM task with the greatest ecological validity (MEMO) was independent of age and measures of executive function but positively related to both learning and retention. Processing speed was a poor predictor of PM performance on all measures (accounting for between 0% and 4% of variance). Taken together, these results highlight the need for circumspection in generalising the role of executive control in age-related prospective memory performance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人们普遍认为,与年龄有关的执行控制能力的下降会导致成年晚期的前瞻性记忆(PM)失效,但迄今为止,这一假设仅在实验室研究中获得了不一致的支持。本研究测试了年龄是否通过(1)特定执行控制操作的个体差异(平行中介模型)或(2)以处理速度为第一中介的序列中介模型间接影响前瞻性记忆。老年人(n = 166)完成了比标准实验室范式具有更高的生态效度的四种 PM 测量,以及执行功能和其他认知能力的测量。结果表明,虽然年龄是导致三项自闭症测量(尤其是基于时间的任务)成绩下降的重要预测因素,但在对执行功能进行控制后,这些负面的年龄关联只会略微减弱。在生态效度最高的 PM 任务(MEMO)上的表现与年龄和执行功能的测量结果无关,但与学习能力和保持能力呈正相关。在所有测量指标中,处理速度对 PM 表现的预测效果都很差(占方差的 0% 到 4%)。综上所述,这些结果突出表明,在概括执行控制在与年龄相关的前瞻性记忆表现中的作用时需要谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
期刊最新文献
Executive control contributes little to prospective memory function in older age: evidence from more ecologically valid paradigms. The mediating role of impulsivity in the relationship between executive functions (working memory, inhibition) and prospective memory. Development and validation of the Closure and Resolution Scale (CRS). People experience similar intrusions about past and future autobiographical negative experiences. Comparison of working memory performance in athletes and non-athletes: a meta-analysis of behavioural studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1