Cost avoidance underlies decisions to use prospective memory reminders.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory & Cognition Pub Date : 2025-02-10 DOI:10.3758/s13421-025-01683-3
B Hunter Ball, Phil Peper
{"title":"Cost avoidance underlies decisions to use prospective memory reminders.","authors":"B Hunter Ball, Phil Peper","doi":"10.3758/s13421-025-01683-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent evidence suggests that offloading demands on to external sources can improve the remembering of future plans (i.e., prospective memory). The purpose of the current study was to better understand the mechanisms by which participants choose to offload prospective memory demands. Participants formed the intention to later respond to either one (low load) or four (high load) prospective memory targets with or without the use of reminders. During reminder trials, participants could press the \"reminder\" key to be shown the learned targets in a \"lookup table.\" The frequency of reminder checking was used to index the willingness to rely on external sources to support remembering. The utility of reminder checking was manipulated by varying the number of distractors presented in the lookup table (Experiment 1), implementing a time penalty for checking the table (Experiment 2), and explicitly describing the effectiveness of using reminders (Experiment 3). The results consistently showed that participants checked reminders more frequently under high memory load (i.e., four targets). Moreover, participants checked reminders less frequently when the costs associated with doing so increased (Experiments 2 and 3). However, confidence in one's own memory ability was not associated with checking frequency. These findings suggest that participants choose to offload, at least in part, to reduce the time or effort to complete the task.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01683-3","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

Recent evidence suggests that offloading demands on to external sources can improve the remembering of future plans (i.e., prospective memory). The purpose of the current study was to better understand the mechanisms by which participants choose to offload prospective memory demands. Participants formed the intention to later respond to either one (low load) or four (high load) prospective memory targets with or without the use of reminders. During reminder trials, participants could press the "reminder" key to be shown the learned targets in a "lookup table." The frequency of reminder checking was used to index the willingness to rely on external sources to support remembering. The utility of reminder checking was manipulated by varying the number of distractors presented in the lookup table (Experiment 1), implementing a time penalty for checking the table (Experiment 2), and explicitly describing the effectiveness of using reminders (Experiment 3). The results consistently showed that participants checked reminders more frequently under high memory load (i.e., four targets). Moreover, participants checked reminders less frequently when the costs associated with doing so increased (Experiments 2 and 3). However, confidence in one's own memory ability was not associated with checking frequency. These findings suggest that participants choose to offload, at least in part, to reduce the time or effort to complete the task.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Memory & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
期刊最新文献
Cost avoidance underlies decisions to use prospective memory reminders. Examining the semantic relatedness effect on working memory with ad hoc categories. Expecting the unexpected: Examining the interplay between real-world knowledge and contextual cues during language comprehension. Temporal attention modulates distraction resistance of visual working memory representations. The impact of cross-language co-activation of cognates on bilingual performance on the reading span task.
×
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