Furthermore, when task interference was minimal or absent, focal PM performance remained relatively high whereas nonfocal PM performance was near floor (Experiment 4). We found that the nonfocal condition was more likely than the focal condition to produce costs to the lexical decision task (task interference). Accordingly, in Experiments 3 and 4 we designated either an initial-letter or a particular word as a prospective memory cue in the context of a lexical decision task, a task that presumably directs attention to focal processing of words but not initial-letters. In Experiment 1 we show that syllable cues (used in Einstein et al.) are more difficult to monitor for than word cues however, initial-letter cues (in words) are similar in monitoring difficulty to word cues (Experiments 2a and 2b). We investigated whether focal/nonfocal effects (e.g., Einstein et al., 2005) in prospective memory (PM) are explained by cue differences in monitoring difficulty.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |