Emilie Joly-Burra, Maximilian Haas, Gianvito Laera, Paolo Ghisletta, Matthias Kliegel, Sascha Zuber
{"title":"From attentional fluctuations to intentional fluctuations? Monitoring behavior and intraindividual variability in time-based prospective memory.","authors":"Emilie Joly-Burra, Maximilian Haas, Gianvito Laera, Paolo Ghisletta, Matthias Kliegel, Sascha Zuber","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In sharp contrast to event-based prospective memory (PM), dynamics of (re)allocation of attention between the ongoing and PM tasks have been much less investigated in time-based PM tasks. We propose an in-depth examination of attention allocation in a time-based PM task by jointly analyzing multiple indicators of time-monitoring behavior, net and time-structured intraindividual variability (IIV) in ongoing-task reaction times (OT RTs), and task performance. Results from dynamic structural equation modeling in a lifespan sample of 198 adults (19-86 years) revealed that larger fluctuations in OT RTs (net IIV) predicted poorer OT performance, but fostered a more efficient pattern of time-monitoring behavior (i.e., checking a clock more frequently and strategically, and slowing OT RTs during the PM response window) that, in turn, enhanced PM. Conversely, greater inertia in OT RTs (time-structured IIV) led to fewer clock-checks and poorer PM performance. Focusing attention on time monitoring to enhance PM performance did not detrimentally affect OT accuracy. Instead, participants showed a speed-accuracy tradeoff to optimize both OT and PM accuracies by slowing their OT RTs during the PM response window. This study therefore shows that two concomitant aspects of IIV (net and time-structured IIV) not only predicted time-monitoring behavior, but also OT and PM accuracies differentially, hence advocating for the necessity to consider both aspects of IIV and time monitoring together to better understand attention allocation policies in time-based PM tasks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001344","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In sharp contrast to event-based prospective memory (PM), dynamics of (re)allocation of attention between the ongoing and PM tasks have been much less investigated in time-based PM tasks. We propose an in-depth examination of attention allocation in a time-based PM task by jointly analyzing multiple indicators of time-monitoring behavior, net and time-structured intraindividual variability (IIV) in ongoing-task reaction times (OT RTs), and task performance. Results from dynamic structural equation modeling in a lifespan sample of 198 adults (19-86 years) revealed that larger fluctuations in OT RTs (net IIV) predicted poorer OT performance, but fostered a more efficient pattern of time-monitoring behavior (i.e., checking a clock more frequently and strategically, and slowing OT RTs during the PM response window) that, in turn, enhanced PM. Conversely, greater inertia in OT RTs (time-structured IIV) led to fewer clock-checks and poorer PM performance. Focusing attention on time monitoring to enhance PM performance did not detrimentally affect OT accuracy. Instead, participants showed a speed-accuracy tradeoff to optimize both OT and PM accuracies by slowing their OT RTs during the PM response window. This study therefore shows that two concomitant aspects of IIV (net and time-structured IIV) not only predicted time-monitoring behavior, but also OT and PM accuracies differentially, hence advocating for the necessity to consider both aspects of IIV and time monitoring together to better understand attention allocation policies in time-based PM tasks. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
与基于事件的前瞻性记忆(PM)形成鲜明对比的是,在基于时间的前瞻性记忆任务中,注意力在进行中任务和前瞻性记忆任务之间的(再)分配动态研究要少得多。我们建议通过联合分析时间监控行为的多个指标、进行中任务反应时间(OT RTs)的净值和时间结构个体内变异性(IIV)以及任务表现,对基于时间的前瞻性记忆任务中的注意力分配进行深入研究。对 198 名成年人(19-86 岁)进行的动态结构方程建模结果表明,OT 反应时间的较大波动(净 IIV)预示着较差的 OT 成绩,但却促进了更有效的时间监控行为模式(即更频繁、更有策略地查看时钟,并在下午的反应窗口期间减慢 OT 反应时间),进而提高了下午的成绩。相反,OT 实时反应(时间结构 IIV)的惰性越大,则时钟检查次数越少,PM 表现越差。将注意力集中在时间监控上以提高 PM 成绩并不会对 OT 准确性产生不利影响。相反,受试者表现出了速度-准确性的权衡,通过在下午反应窗口期间减慢他们的 OT 实时时间来优化 OT 和 PM 的准确性。因此,本研究表明,IIV的两个并存方面(净IIV和时间结构IIV)不仅能预测时间监控行为,还能预测不同的OT和PM准确率,因此主张有必要同时考虑IIV和时间监控这两个方面,以更好地理解基于时间的PM任务中的注意力分配政策。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.