Marta Menéndez-Granda, Nadine Schmidt, Gianvito Laera, Annick Clenin, Matthias Kliegel, Michael Orth, Jessica Peter
{"title":"Factors explaining age-related prospective memory performance differences: a meta-analysis.","authors":"Marta Menéndez-Granda, Nadine Schmidt, Gianvito Laera, Annick Clenin, Matthias Kliegel, Michael Orth, Jessica Peter","doi":"10.1093/geronb/gbaf020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The age-prospective memory paradox states that younger adults perform better than older adults in laboratory tasks, while the opposite has been observed for naturalistic tasks. These terms insufficiently characterise tasks and task settings. We therefore revisited the age-prospective memory paradox using a newly developed taxonomy to better understand how tasks characteristics or task settings contribute to age-related differences in performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis of 138 studies, classifying prospective memory tasks according to our newly developed taxonomy. The taxonomy included 9 categories that considered how close any task or task setting was to daily life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When categorizing relevant studies with this taxonomy, we found that older adults did better than younger adults in 'close to real-life' tasks done at home and, particularly, in to-do lists and diary tasks. However, they did worse in 'far from real-life' tasks done in naturalistic environments or in simulations of real-life tasks in a laboratory.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Results of this meta-analysis suggest that the level of abstraction of a task and familiarity of the environment in which the task is taken can explain some of the differences between performances of younger and older people. This is relevant for the choice of task settings and task properties to experimentally address any prospective memory research questions that are being asked.</p>","PeriodicalId":56111,"journal":{"name":"Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaf020","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The age-prospective memory paradox states that younger adults perform better than older adults in laboratory tasks, while the opposite has been observed for naturalistic tasks. These terms insufficiently characterise tasks and task settings. We therefore revisited the age-prospective memory paradox using a newly developed taxonomy to better understand how tasks characteristics or task settings contribute to age-related differences in performance.
Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of 138 studies, classifying prospective memory tasks according to our newly developed taxonomy. The taxonomy included 9 categories that considered how close any task or task setting was to daily life.
Results: When categorizing relevant studies with this taxonomy, we found that older adults did better than younger adults in 'close to real-life' tasks done at home and, particularly, in to-do lists and diary tasks. However, they did worse in 'far from real-life' tasks done in naturalistic environments or in simulations of real-life tasks in a laboratory.
Discussion: Results of this meta-analysis suggest that the level of abstraction of a task and familiarity of the environment in which the task is taken can explain some of the differences between performances of younger and older people. This is relevant for the choice of task settings and task properties to experimentally address any prospective memory research questions that are being asked.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences publishes articles on development in adulthood and old age that advance the psychological science of aging processes and outcomes. Articles have clear implications for theoretical or methodological innovation in the psychology of aging or contribute significantly to the empirical understanding of psychological processes and aging. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, attitudes, clinical applications, cognition, education, emotion, health, human factors, interpersonal relations, neuropsychology, perception, personality, physiological psychology, social psychology, and sensation.