Assessing Absentmindedness: Prospective Memory Complaint and Impairment in Middle-Aged Adults
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Memory & Cognition 2003, 31 (1), 15-25 Assessing absentmindedness: Prospective memory complaint and impairment in middle-aged adults TIMO MÄNTYLÄ Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden In two experiments, metamemorial differences between prospective and retrospectivememory per- formance were examined. Participants in Experiment 1 were recruited through newspaper advertise- ments and comprised middle-aged women who experienced exceptional problems in prospective re- membering. Experiment 2 involved self-reportersand nonreporters of retrospectivememory problems, who were selected from a large population-based sample of middle-aged adults. In both experiments, memory performance was assessed by using a variety of tasks, including five retrospective memory tasks and three prospective memory tasks that varied in level of realismand retrievalsupport. In both experiments, there were selective differences in memory performance, so that participants who expe- rienced (retrospective or prospective) memory problems showed impaired performance in prospec- tive, but not in retrospective, memory tasks. These findings suggest that memory for future intentions provides a more sensitive task criterion than does memory for past events for assessing individual dif- ferences in self-reportsof episodic memory problems. Task-specific differences in reliance on frontally mediated executive processes might underlie these differences. Everyday mnemonic functioning is determined by the memory functioning as it involves effortful episodic individual’sawareness and knowledge of his or her own memory, automatic episodic memory, prospective mem- mnemonic competence. For instance, whether people ory, and lexical memory” (p. 541). should spend time using an external mnemonic device, In this study, the relation between subjective and ob- such as a notebook, depends on efficiently functioning jective memory performance was examined by focusing metamemory (Intons-Peterson, 1993). Yet, in past re- on a specific instance of episodic memory—namely, search, a weak relation has been observed between self- prospectiveremembering (see Brandimonte, Einstein, & reports of everyday memory functioning and actual per- McDaniel, 1996, for an overview). The present study was formance of laboratory-based tests of episodic memory based on the notion that the relation between subjective (e.g., Herrmann, 1982; Larrabee & Levin, 1986; Scogin, and objective memory performance might be more ap- 1985; Sunderland,Watts, Baddeley,& Harris, 1986; West, parent in prospective memory tasks than in retrospective Boatwright, & Schleser, 1984; see also Dixon & Hultsch, (overall) memory tasks, because memory for future in- 1983; Riege, 1982; Zelinski, Gilewski, & Thompson, tentionsreflects complex mnemonic activities,including 1980, for exceptions). response inhibition, task switching, monitoring, and up- One reason for these discrepancies is that self-reports dating of intentionsand plans (Bisiacchi, 1996; Burgess, of memory problems reflect differences in lifestyle, so- Veitch, de Lacy Costello,& Shallice, 2000; Glisky,1996; cial expectations, and emotional states (Hertzog, Dixon, McDaniel,Glisky, Rubin,Guynn, & Routhieaux,1999;see & Hultsch, 1990; Rabbitt & Abson, 1990). Observed also Shallice & Burgess, 1991; Stuss & Benson, 1987). discrepancies might also be related to the limitations of The task characteristics mentioned above might have criterion variables. As Kausler (1991) noted in his review metamemorial consequences, so that people are particu- of adult age differences in metamemorial functions, “the larly aware of their own mnemonic competence in future- construction of memory questionnaires has been guided oriented tasks. Furthermore, people might be better cal- by an empirical approach, rather than by explicitmemory ibrated for prospective than for retrospective memory theory, such that scores may be derived separately for tasks because to forget one’s intentions can have serious social and practical consequencesin everyday life (Marsh, Hicks, & Landau, 1998; Reason, 1990; Terry, 1988). This research was supported by the Swedish Council for Research in A possibility also exists that metamemorial differ- the Humanities and Social Sciences. I am grateful to Maria Nordin, Gu- ences between prospective and retrospective memory re- nilla Smedberg-Åman, and Pia Tuttle for their assistance in data col- lection. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to flect differences in criterion sensitivity,rather than in the T. Mäntylä, Department of Psychology, Umeå University, S-90187 nature of subjectiveawareness. Given that most prospec- Umeå, Sweden (e-mail: timo.mäntylä@psy.umu.se). tive memory tasks require not only remembering when 15 Copyright 2003 Psychonomic Society, Inc. 16 MÄNTYLÄ but also what should be remembered, self-reports of ratory session, during which the participants completed prospective and retrospective memory might be highly a series of cognitive tasks and questionnaires related to correlated, so that people who consider themselves “ab- lifestyle and experiencedmemory problems. The cognitive sentminded” also report problems in memory for past tasks of the laboratory session includedfour retrospective events, and vice versa. From that perspective,complaints memory tasks and two laboratory-basedtasks of prospec- of prospectivememory problems are not qualitativelydif- tive memory. After performing these and other cognitive ferent from those of retrospectivememory, but prospective tasks (verbal fluency and metamemory judgment), the memory tasks provide a more sensitive criterion for de- participants carried out a naturalistic prospective mem- tecting actual impairments in episodic memory perfor- ory task, which constituted the second phase of the mance. Consistentwith this notion,prospectivememory study. During this field session, the participants were has been considered to be more vulnerable than retro- supposed to remember to make a series of telephone spective memory to the effect of cognitive impairment calls (cf. Maylor, 1990; Moscovitch, 1982). in dementia (Huppert & Beardsall, 1993). Furthermore, The final phase of the study was completed 1 year age-related differences in episodic memory performance after the laboratory and field sessions. One important are typicallyaccentuated in tasks that are assumed to de- objectiveof the follow-up phase was to examine whether pend on executivefunctioning(Cohen & Faulkner, 1989; complaints of prospective memory would be reported Craik, Morris, Morris, & Loewen, 1990; Erngrund, Män- even 1 year later. Specifically, prospectivememory com- tylä, & Nilsson, 1996; Hashtroudi, Johnson, & Chros- plaints might be related to contextualand temporary fac- niak, 1989; McIntyre & Craik, 1987). tors during the test period, so that the self-reporters In the present study, subjective and objective memory would experience similar memory problems 1 year later. performance was examined in middle-aged, rather than This issue is also important because few studies have ex- older, adults. One reason for this specific focus was that amined longitudinal changes in (overall) memory com- the effects of individual and age-specific differences in plaints (but see Smith, Ivnik, Malec, & Tangalos, 1993; lifestyle and social expectations would be reduced by Taylor, Miller, & Tinklenberg, 1992), and past research studying healthy, middle-aged adults. Furthermore, re- concerning the stability of more specific memory com- search on middle-aged adults’ metacognitive functions plaints, such as remembering future intentions,has been has been a rather neglected area in the memory litera- virtually nonexistent. ture, because the primary interest of past research has One central objective of this study was to examine the been on children’s and elderly adults’ metamemorial relation between objectiveand subjectivememory perfor- functioning. mance under conditions in which the effects of depres- Two complementary approaches for examiningthe va- sion and anxiety were minimized. Specifically, because lidity of subjective memory complaints in prospective a stronger relation has been found between subjective memory were used. Experiment 1 was focused on individ- memory assessments and depression than with actual uals who experienced exceptional problems in prospec- (retrospective) memory performance (e.g., Kahn, Zarit, tive remembering and involved healthy, middle-aged Hilbert, & Niederehe, 1975; McGlone et al., 1990; women who were recruited through newspaper advertise- Poinrenaud, Malbezin, & Guez, 1989), only individuals ments. These individualsconsidered themselvesto be ex- who were considered to be free from depressive symp- ceptionally absentminded in that they frequently forgot toms participatedin the study.Also, only healthy middle- important everyday activities, such as planned appoint- aged individuals were included, because past research ments and meetings, although they did not experience has found that not only symptoms of depression, but also similar problems in other cognitivetasks, such as memory somatic health problems are associated with higher lev- for past events. These self-reporters of prospectivemem- els of memory complaints (Cutler & Grams, 1988; Tun, ory problems were compared with a similar group of non- Perlmutter, Russo, & Nathan, 1987). reporters, who did not acknowledge having problems in episodic remembering. Method Experiment 2 was based on a more traditional recruit- Participants. During the recruitment phase, potential partici-