Implementation intentions about nonfocal event-based prospective memory tasks

Original Article

Abstract

Implementation intentions are detailed and systematic plans that are developed during intention formation. We compared two different implementation intentions to standard event-based prospective memory instructions using three different kinds of intentions. Two of these intentions involved nonfocal cues whereas the remaining intention was about specific, focal cues. Implementation intentions dramatically increased detection performance for the nonfocal intentions. Because the exact cues could not be specified during intention formation, we argue that cue salience and that strengthening the cue to target action association are not very viable mechanisms to explain all instances of the beneficial consequences of forming implementation intentions.

Notes

Acknowledgment

We thank Candace Miller and Jesse Lynch for their dedicated help in collecting the data.

References

  1. Chasteen, A. L., Park, D. C., & Schwarz, N. (2001). Implementation intentions and facilitation of prospective memory. Psychological Science, 12, 457–461.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Cohen, A. L., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2008). The cost of remembering to remember: Cognitive load and implementation intentions influence ongoing task performance. In M. Kleigel, M. A. McDaniel, & G. O. Einstein (Eds.), Prospective memory: Cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives (pp. 367–390). New York: Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (2005). Prospective memory: Multiple retrieval processes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 286–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Thomas, R., Mayfield, S., Shank, H., Morrisette, N., et al. (2005). Multiple processes in prospective memory retrieval: Factors determining monitoring versus spontaneous retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Einstein, G. O., McDaniel, M. A., Williford, C. L., Pagan, J. L., & Dismukes, R. K. (2003). Forgetting of intentions in demanding situations is rapid. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 147–162.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellis, J. A. (2008). Ten years on: Realizing delayed intentions. In M. Kleigel, M. A. McDaniel, & G. O. Einstein (Eds.), Prospective memory: Cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives (pp. 1–27). New York: Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Ellis, J., Kvavilashvili, L., & Milne, A. (1999). Experimental tests of prospective remembering: The influence of cue-event frequency on performance. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 9–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellis, J., & Milne, A. (1996). Retrieval cue specificity and the realization of delayed intentions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 862–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intention: Strong effects of simple of plan. American Psychologist, 54, 493–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gollwitzer, P. M., & Schaal, B. (1998). Metacognition in action: The importance of implementation intentions. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 2, 124–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guynn, M., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). Target pre-exposure eliminates the effect of distraction on event-based prospective memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 484–488.Google Scholar
  13. Hicks, J. L., Marsh, R. L., & Cook, G. I. (2005). Task interference in time-based, event-based, and dual intention prospective memory conditions. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 430–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holland, R. W., Aarts, H., & Langendam, D. (2006). Breaking and creating habits on the working floor: A field-experiment on the power of implementation intentions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 776–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kliegel, M., Martin, M., McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2001). Varying the importance of a prospective memory task: Differential effects across time- and event-based prospective memory. Memory, 9, 1–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Liu, L. L., & Park, D. C. (2004). Aging and medical adherence: The use of automatic processes to achieve effortful things. Psychology and Aging, 19, 318–325.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Mäntylä, T. (1993). Priming effects in prospective memory. Memory, 1, 203–218.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Marsh, R. L., Cook, G. I., & Hicks, J. L. (2006). Task interference from event-based intentions can be material specific. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1636–1643.Google Scholar
  20. Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Cook, G. I. (2005). On the relationship between effort toward an ongoing task and cue detection in event-based prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 68–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Cook, G. I. (2008). On beginning to understand the role of context in prospective memory. In: M. Kliegel, M. A. McDaniel, & G. O. Einstein (Eds.), Prospective memory: Cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives (pp. 77–100). New York: Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  22. Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., Cook, G. I., Hansen, J. S., & Pallos, A. L. (2003). Interference to ongoing activities covaries with the characteristics of an event-based intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 861–870.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Landau, J. D. (1998). An investigation of everyday prospective memory. Memory & Cognition, 26, 633–643.Google Scholar
  24. Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Watson, V. (2002). The dynamics of intention retrieval and coordination of action in event-based prospective memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 652–659.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Maylor, E. A. (1996). Age-related impairment in an event-based prospective memory task. Psychology and Aging, 11, 74–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Maylor, E. A. (1998). Changes in event-based prospective memory across the adulthood. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 5, 107–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2000). Strategic and automatic processes in prospective memory retrieval: A multiprocess framework. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, S127–S144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McDaniel, M. A., Guynn, M. J., Einstein, G. O., & Breneiser, J. (2004). Cue-focused and reflexive-associative processes in prospective memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 605–614.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. McDaniel, M. A., Howard, D. C., & Butler, K. (2008). Implementation intentions facilitate prospective memory under high attention demands. Memory & Cognition, 36, 716–724.Google Scholar
  30. Moscovitch, M. (1994). Memory and working with memory: Evaluation of a component process model and comparisons with other models. In D. L. Schacter & E. Tulving (Eds.), Memory systems (pp. 260–310). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Orbell, S., Hodgkins, S., & Sheeran, P. (1997). Implementation intentions and the theory of planned behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(9), 953–962.Google Scholar
  32. Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (1999). Implementation intentions and repeated behaviours: Enhancing the predictive validity of the theory of planned behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 349–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Trötschel, R., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2007). Implementation intentions and the willful pursuit of prosocial goals in negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 579–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Webb, T. L., & Sheeran, P. (2003). Can implementation intentions help to overcome ego depletion? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 279–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. West, R., Krompinger, J., & Bowry, R. (2005). Disruptions of preparatory attention contribute to failures of prospective memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 502–507.Google Scholar
  37. Winograd, E. (1988). Some observations on prospective remembering. In M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical Aspects of Memory: Current Research and Issues (Vol. 2, pp. 348–353). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations