Toward an Ecological Approach to Prospective Memory? The Impact of Neisser's Seminal Talk on Prospective Memory Research
Beat Meier
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01005
IF: 3.8
2019-05-03
Frontiers in Psychology
Abstract:<h1>Toward an Ecological Approach to Prospective Memory? The Impact of Neisser's Seminal Talk on Prospective Memory Research</h1><a href="http://www.frontiersin.org/people/u/2986">Beat Meier</a><sup>*</sup><ul><li>Institute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland</li></ul><p>Prospective memory is important because it enables a person to lead an autonomous life by remembering duties, chores, and appointments. Examples such as remembering to pick up the kids at daycare on the way home from work, meet your doctor to check the blood pressure tomorrow at 2 o'clock, or remembering to take your anticoagulants are some of the typical examples.</p><p>In his seminal talk entitled “Memory: What are the important questions?” <a href="#B28">Neisser (1978)</a> harshly criticized mainstream memory psychology because its lack of ecological validity. Neisser outlined some ecologically important questions that have resulted in a substantial research interest in the meantime. Amongst other areas such as involuntary memories, childhood memories, the function of memory for self-improvement, and eyewitness memory, Neisser emphasized that “memory is also involved in many activities of daily life. We make a plan and have to remember to carry it out.” This kind of memory has become a focus of memory research under the label “prospective memory.”</p><p>In an initial phase, prospective memory research was characterized by naturalistic research paradigms that involved calling the experimenter by telephone or sending postcards, and many of these studies can be criticized by the lack of rigorous experimental control. In order to combine the advantage of ecological valid tasks and laboratory control, naturalistic task were adopted for the use in the lab (for example, remember to sign a sheet, <a href="#B6">Dobbs and Rule, 1987</a>; remember to hang up a telephone receiver, <a href="#B15">Kvavilashvili, 1987</a>). Some eminent memory researchers were involved and contributed to the emerging topic by introducing theoretical distinctions or empirical observations (<a href="#B16">Loftus, 1971</a>; <a href="#B38">Wilkins and Baddeley, 1978</a>; <a href="#B2">Baddeley and Wilkins, 1984</a>).</p><p><a href="#B2">Baddeley and Wilkins (1984)</a> introduced a distinction between different kinds of prospective memory domains, such as prospective semantic memory for describing action slips vs. prospective episodic memory “to remember an arbitrary novel action.” The latter domain has become the main focus of prospective memory research by now while the former has not received as much attention. Similarly, they distinguished between short- and long-term prospective memory, as in the domain of retrospective memory. Notably this distinction has not been integrated on a theoretical level, although it would be easy to classify “modern” paradigm according to this dimension. Overall, this initial phase of prospective memory research was characterized by many interesting observations, some theoretical distinctions, but no systematic agenda.</p><p>Ironically, a systematic investigation of the field did not begin before the topic was brought into the laboratory. A milestone was the publication of the seminal study by <a href="#B7">Einstein and McDaniel (1990)</a>. This study received a lot of attention mainly due to two reasons. First, an easy-to-use laboratory paradigm was introduced in which a prospective memory task was embedded in an ongoing task. The essential idea was to have participants busily working on one task, while at the same time requiring them to perform a different activity when a particular event occurred. From an ecological approach point of view, this situation was considered as similar to drive home from work (ongoing task) with the intention to stop at the supermarket (i.e., the target event) to buy groceries. Specifically, Einstein and McDaniel used a short-term memory task as an ongoing task which involved the presentation of different word lists. The prospective memory task consisted of remembering to press a particular key on a computer keyboard when a particular target word appeared within a short term memory test list. The word was presented repeatedly (i.e., three times) in order to achieve a more reliable measure of prospective memory. The second reason why the study attracted a lot of interest was because it provided an unexpected result. Motivated by Craik's framework of age-related memory effects, according to which tasks that require more self-initiated processes result in the strongest age-related decline, Einstein and McDaniel hypothesized that prospective memory tasks would result in large age effects due the requirement to self-initiate retrieval (<a href="#B4">Craik, 1986</a>). Surprisingly, however, across two experiments no age effects materialized suggesting that prospective memory may differ markedly from retrospective memory. Although follow-up r<p>-Abstract Truncated-</p>
psychology, multidisciplinary