The content of prospective memory is comprised of representations of an action to perform in the future. When people form prospective memories, they temporarily put the memory representation in an inactive state while engaging in other activities, and then activate the representation in the future. Ultimately, successful activation of the memory representation yields an action at an appropriate, but temporally distant, time. A hallmark of prospective memory is that activation of the memory representation has a deleterious effect on current ongoing activity. Recent evidence suggests that scrub jays and non-human primates, but not other species, are capable of future planning. We hypothesized that prospective memory produces a selective deficit in performance at the time when rats access a memory representation but not when the memory representation is inactive. Rats were trained in a temporal bisection task (90 min/day). Immediately after the bisection task, half of the rats received an 8-g meal (meal group) and the other rats received no additional food (no-meal group). Sensitivity to time in the bisection task was reduced as the 90-min interval elapsed for the meal group but not for the no-meal group. This time-based prospective-memory effect was not based on response competition, an attentional limit, anticipatory contrast, or fatigue. Our results suggest that rats form prospective memories, which produces a negative side effect on ongoing activity.
KeywordsProspective memory Prospection Comparative cognition Animal model Rat
This work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grant R01MH080052 to JDC. We thank our colleague, the late Rich Marsh–scholar of prospective memory–for encouraging this work. We thank four anonymous reviewers for constructive criticism.
Conflict of interest
The experiments complied with the current laws of country in which they were performed. The authors declare no conflict of interests.
- Blanco-Campal A, Coen RF, Lawlor BA, Walsh JB, Burke TE (2009) Detection of prospective memory deficits in mild cognitive impairment of suspected Alzheimer?s disease etiology using a novel event-based prospective memory task. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 15(01):154–159. doi: 10.1017/S1355617708090127 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Church RM (1978) The internal clock. In: Hulse SH, Fowler H, Honig WK (eds) Cognitive processes in animal behavior. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 277–310Google Scholar
- Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
- Craik FIM (1986) A functional account of age differences in memory. In: Hagendorf FKH (ed) Human memory and cognitive capabilities: mechanisms and performances. Elsevier, North Holland, pp 409–422Google Scholar
- Flaherty CF (1996) Incentive relativity. Problems in the behavioural sciences. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Gallistel CR (1990) The organization of learning. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Gibbon J, Church RM, Meck WH (1984) Scalar timing in memory. In: Gibbon J, Allan L (eds) Annals of the New York academy of sciences: timing and time perception, vol 423. New York Academy of Sciences, New York, pp 52–77Google Scholar
- Harris JE (1984) Remembering to do things: a forgotten topic. In: Harris JE, Morris PE (eds) Everyday memory, actions, and absent-mindedness. Academic Press, London, pp 71–92Google Scholar
- McDaniel MA, Einstein GO (2007) Prospective memory: an overview and synthesis of an emerging field. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
- Raskin SA, Woods SP, Poquette AJ, McTaggart AB, Sethna J, Williams RC, Tröster AI (2011) A differential deficit in time- versus event-based prospective memory in Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychology 25(2):201–209Google Scholar
- Sheskin DJ (2004) Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures, 3rd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Tulving E (2001) Chronesthesia: awareness of subjective time. In: Stuss DT, Knight RC (eds) The age of the frontal lobes. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 311–325Google Scholar