ArticleMemory & cognition2025
Looking for cues over time: A study on self-initiated monitoring in event-based and time-based prospective memory.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prospective memory (PM) is the ability to remember to perform an intended action in the future. In everyday life, people often have contextual information (e.g., the presence of cues) to support the completion of their PM tasks. The present study aimed to investigate how context (as probability of PM cue occurrence over time) and predictability affect PM. In two experiments, participants performed a laboratory PM task having the possibility to check the probability of the next PM cue occurrence whenever they wished; PM cue probability was manipulated to be temporally informative (predictable) or uninformative (unpredictable) on the actual PM cue occurrence. Both experiments showed that PM accuracy and cost on ongoing task performance increased with the presence of contextual information. Experiment 2 showed that this effect was independent of cue focality for PM accuracy but not for PM cost, for which the effect of context was particularly strong for non-focal compared to focal cues. Participants monitored the PM cue with uniform frequency over time, regardless of the context's predictability, and checked the probability of PM cue occurrence more often when the cue was non-focal compared to focal. This study showed the importance of contextual information in PM, highlighting the capacity of people to adapt the allocation of attentional resources systematically over time to optimize strategic monitoring and, in turn, PM performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.