Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The factorial structure and external validity of the prospective and retrospective memory questionnaire in older adults

  • Original Investigation
  • Published:
European Journal of Ageing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The factorial structure of the Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ) was investigated in a sample of 336 older adults (aged 66–81 years). Confirmatory factor analyses showed that a bifactor model of two correlated factors of prospective and retrospective memory problems and two uncorrelated group factors of positively and negatively worded items had the best fit. Such a model can be seen as a multitrait-multi-method model that separates the substantive and methodological components among the items of the PRMQ. Correlations of the four factors with external criteria (affect, neuroticism, prospective, and retrospective memory performance) revealed that the item wording factors mainly correlate with the affect variables, whereas the prospective and retrospective memory problem factors were differentially associated with memory performance. As a conceptual conclusion, these differential correlations give support to the discriminant validity of subjective prospective versus retrospective memory problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The original items can be retrieved from the PRMQ website at http://www.psy.ed.ac.uk/research/hcn/PRMQclick/document_view.

  2. For reasons of comparison, Model 1 was re-estimated while treating the PRMQ items as interval-scaled. Fit indices were lower (CFI = 0.773, SRMR = 0.106), as was the average standardized factor loading (.43). One reason for this may be that most items exhibited considerable skewness, which in case of only a few answer categories makes the ordered-categorical approach more suitable (cf. Muthén and Kaplan 1985).

  3. Model 4 was also re-estimated treating the PRMQ items as interval-scaled. Again, although findings were virtually the same, fit indices were lower (CFI = 0.935, SRMR = 0.069). Once more, this shows that treating the PRMQ items as ordered-categorical not only is statistically more suitable but also comes with the benefit of a better model fit.

References

  • Allemand M, Zimprich D, Hendriks AAJ (2008) Age differences in five personality domains across the lifespan. Develop Psychol 44:758–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomew DJ (1980) Factor analysis for categorical data. J R Stat Soc B 42:293–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh JC, Feldman JM, Hertzog C (1998) Memory beliefs as social cognition: a reconceptualization of what memory questionnaires assess. Rev Gen Psychol 2:48–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christofferson A (1975) Factor analysis of dichotomized variables. Psychometrika 40:5–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen RJ, Swerdlik ME, Phillips SM (1996) Psychological testing and assessment: an introduction to tests and measurement. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR (1992) Professional manual: revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI). PAR, Odessa, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford JR, Smith G, Maylor EA, Della Sala S, Logie RH (2003) The prospective and retrospective memory questionnaire (PRMQ): normative data and latent structure in a large non-clinical sample. Memory 11:261–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford JR, Henry JD, Ward AL, Blake J (2006) The prospective and retrospective memory questionnaire (PRMQ): latent structure, normative data and discrepancy analysis. Br J Clin Psychol 45:83–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach LJ (1946) Response sets and test design. Educ Psychol Measur 6:475–494

    Google Scholar 

  • DiStefano C (2002) The impact of categorization with confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modeling 9:327–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein GO, McDaniel MA (1990) Normal aging and prospective memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 16:717–726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein GO, McDaniel MA (1996) Retrieval processes in prospective memory: theoretical approaches and some new findings. In: Brandimonte M, Einstein GO, McDaniel MA (eds) Prospective memory: theory and applications. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 115–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Flora DB, Curran PJ (2004) An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychol Methods 9:466–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental-state: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12:189–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemphill JF (2003) Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. Am Psychol 58:78–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess TM, Auman C, Colcombe SJ, Rahhal TA (2003) The impact of stereotype threat on age differences in memory performance. J Gerontol 58B:3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliegel M, Zimprich D (2005) Predictors of cognitive complaints in older adults: a mixture regression approach. Eur J Aging 2:13–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kliegel M, Jäger T, Altgassen M, Shum D (2008a) Clinical neuropsychology of prospective memory. In: Kliegel M, McDaniel MA, Einstein GO (eds) Prospective memory: cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 283–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Kliegel M, McDaniel MA, Einstein GO (eds) (2008b) Prospective memory: cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives. Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh HW (1996) Positive and negative self-esteem: a substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? J Pers Soc Psychol 70:810–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh HW, Grayson D (1995) Latent variable models of multitrait–multimethod data. In: Hoyle RH (ed) Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 177–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Motl RW, DiStefano C (2002) Longitudinal invariance of self-esteem and method effects associated with negatively worded items. Struct Equ Model 9:562–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén BO (1984) A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered-categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika 49:115–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén BO, Kaplan D (1985) A comparison of some methodologies for the factor-analysis of non-normal Likert variables. Br J Math Stat Psychol 38:171–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2004) Mplus user’s guide. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus DL (1991) Measurement and control of response bias. In: Robinson JP, Shaver PR, Wrightsman LS (eds) Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp 17–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Rast P, Zimprich D, van Boxtel M, Jolles J (2009) Factorial structure and measurement invariance of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire across the adult lifespan. Assessment 16:145–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rönnlund M, Mäntyla T, Nilsson L–G (2008) The prospective and retrospective memory questionnaire (PRMQ): factorial structure, relations to global subjective memory ratings, and Swedish norms. Scand J Psychol 49:11–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salthouse TA, Berish DE, Siedlecki KL (2004) Construct validity and age sensitivity of prospective memory. Mem Cogn 32:1133–1148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT (2005) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton–Mifflin, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith G, Della Sala S, Logie R, Maylor EA (2000) Prospective and retrospective memory in normal aging and dementia: a questionnaire study. Memory 8:311–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson D, Clark LA (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 54:1063–1070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson D, Pennebaker JW (1989) Health complaints, stress, and distress: exploring the central role of negative affectivity. Psychol Rev 96:233–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, Lum O, Huang V, Adey M et al (1983) Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res 17:37–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yung YF, Thissen D, McLeod LD (1999) On the relationship between the higher-order factor model and the hierarchical factor model. Psychometrika 64:113–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeintl M, Kliegel M, Rast P, Zimprich D (2006) Prospective memory complaints can be predicted by prospective memory performance in older adults. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 22:209–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeintl M, Kliegel M, Hofer SM (2007) The role of processing resources in prospective and retrospective memory within old age. Psychol Aging 22:826–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimprich D, Rast P (2009) Verbal learning changes in older adults across 18 months. Aging Neuropsychol Cogn 16:461–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimprich D, Martin M, Kliegel M (2003) Subjective cognitive complaints, memory performance, and depressive affect in old age: a change-oriented approach. Int J Aging Hum Dev 57:341–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimprich D, Perren S, Hornung R (2005) A two-level confirmatory factor analysis of a modified Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Educ Psychol Measur 65:465–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimprich D, Martin M, Kliegel M, Dellenbach M, Rast P, Zeintl M (2008) Cognitive abilities in old age: results from the Zurich longitudinal study on cognitive aging. Swiss J Psychol 67:177–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The Zurich Longitudinal Study on Cognitive Aging (ZULU) is supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation, grants SNSF-100013-103525 and SNSF-100014-122613/1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gerontopsychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Zurich, Binzmühlestrasse, 14/Box 24, 8050, Zürich, Switzerland

    Daniel Zimprich

  2. University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    Matthias Kliegel

  3. University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

    Philippe Rast

Authors
  1. Daniel Zimprich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthias Kliegel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philippe Rast
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Zimprich.

Additional information

Communicated by H. W. Wahl.

Appendix

Appendix

Wordings of the positively worded items used in the study

Item no.

Wording

1

If I decide to do something in a few minutes’ time, I seldom forget to do it

2

I hardly fail to recognise a place I have visited before

10

If I intend to take something with me, before leaving a room or going out, I rarely leave it behind

11

I rarely mislay something that I have just put down, like a magazine or glasses

12

I seldom fail to mention or give something to a visitor that I was asked to pass on

13

I seldom look at something without realising that I have seen it moments before

14

If I tried to contact a friend or relative who was out, I hardly forget to try again later

15

I rarely forget what I watched on television the previous day

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zimprich, D., Kliegel, M. & Rast, P. The factorial structure and external validity of the prospective and retrospective memory questionnaire in older adults. Eur J Ageing 8, 39–48 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-011-0174-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-011-0174-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation