Memory for medication side effects in younger and older adults: The role of subjective and objective importance
Older adults often experience memory impairments, but sometimes they can use selective processing and schematic support to remember important information. In the present experiments, we investigated the degrees to which younger and healthy older adults remembered medication side effects that were subjectively or objectively important to remember. Participants studied a list of common side effects and rated how negative these effects would be if they were to experience them, and they were then given a free recall test. In Experiment 1, the severity of the side effects ranged from mild (e.g., itching) to severe (e.g., stroke), and in Experiment 2, certain side effects were indicated as being critical to remember (i.e., “contact your doctor if you experience this”). We observed no age differences in terms of free recall of the side effects, and older adults remembered more severe side effects than mild effects. However, older adults were less likely to recognize the critical side effects on a later recognition test, relative to younger adults. These findings suggest that older adults can selectively remember medication side effects but have difficulty identifying familiar but potentially critical side effects, and this has implications for monitoring medication use in older age.
KeywordsMemory Aging Medications Side effects Older adults
M.C.F. is now at the Harvard Initiative for Learning and Teaching, Harvard University. We thank Monika Holser, Stephanie Knipprath, and Angel Wu for help with data collection, and Barbara Knowlton, Douglas Bell, and Robert Bjork for helpful comments. This research was conducted in partial fulfillment of a doctoral dissertation by M.C.F. at the University of California, Los Angeles. This research was presented at the 15th Biennial Cognitive Aging Conference, Atlanta, GA. This research was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health (National Institute on Aging), Award Number R01AG044335.
- Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. In P. B. Baltes & M. M. Baltes (Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences (pp. 1–34). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Castel, A. D. (2008). The adaptive and strategic use of memory by older adults: Evaluative processing and value-directed remembering. In A. S. Benjamin & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 48, pp. 225–270). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(07)48006-9 Google Scholar
- Castel, A. D., McGillivray, S., & Friedman, M. C. (2012). Metamemory and memory efficiency in older adults: Learning about the benefits of priority processing and value-directed remembering. In M. Naveh-Benjamin & N. Ohta (Eds.), Memory and aging: Current issues and future directions (pp. 245–270). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Craik, F. I. M. (2002). Human memory and aging. In L. Bäckman & C. von Hofsten (Eds.), Psychology at the turn of the millennium (pp. 261–280). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Craik, F. I. M., & Bosman, B. A. (1992). Age-related changes in memory and learning. In H. Bouma & J. A. M. Graafmans (Eds.), Gerontechnology (pp. 79–92). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.Google Scholar
- Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60041-9 Google Scholar
- Lustig, C., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (2007). Inhibitory deficit theory: Recent developments in a “new view” (pp. 145–162). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (2007). Prospective memory components most at risk for older adults and implications for medication adherence. In D. C. Park & L. L. Liu (Eds.), Medical adherence and aging: Social and cognitive perspectives (pp. 49–75). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McDaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O., & Jacoby, L. L. (2008). New considerations in aging and memory: The glass may be half full. In F. I. M. Craik & T. Salthouse (Eds.), The handbook of aging and cognition (3rd ed., pp. 255–310). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- McGillivray, S., & Castel, A. D. (2014). Older and younger adults’ strategic control of metacognitive monitoring: The role of consequences, task experience, and prior knowledge. Manuscript under review.Google Scholar
- Murayama, K., Sakaki, M., Yan, V. X., & Smith, G. M. (2014). Type-1 error inflation in the traditional by-participant analysis to metamemory accuracy: A generalized mixed-effects model perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1287–1306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Qato, D. M., Alexander, G. C., Conti, R. M., Johnson, M., Schumm, P., & Lindau, S. T. (2008). Use of prescription and over-the-counter medications and dietary supplements among older adults in the United States. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 300, 2867–2878.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar