Department of Psychology, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA.
Memory. 2020 Aug;28(7):918-925. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2020.1798463. Epub 2020 Jul 23.
Although much recent research has focused on event-based prospective memory (PM), fewer studies have compared event- and time-based PM. In the current study, two experiments were conducted to directly compare ongoing task costs of focal and non-focal event-based tasks with a time-based task. In the second experiment, an external reminder of the task was present to test whether this reduced the cost of the time-based task. PM accuracy was significantly greater for the focal conditions, as predicted. Response times (RT) were highest in the non-focal tasks, with similar RTs in the focal and time-based tasks. Clock check frequency was significantly related to making a PM response in the time-based task, with clock checks increasing as the 7 min target time approached. While time-based tasks may be more difficult to complete, they do not seem to result in the speed cost to an ongoing task that non-focal PM tasks do.
尽管最近的许多研究都集中在基于事件的前瞻性记忆（PM）上，但比较基于事件和基于时间的 PM 的研究较少。在当前的研究中，进行了两项实验来直接比较基于事件的焦点任务和非焦点任务与基于时间的任务的持续任务成本。在第二项实验中，存在外部提醒任务，以测试这是否降低了基于时间的任务的成本。如预测的那样，PM 准确性在焦点条件下显著更高。反应时间（RT）在非焦点任务中最高，而在焦点和基于时间的任务中 RT 相似。在基于时间的任务中，时钟检查的频率与做出 PM 反应显著相关，随着 7 分钟目标时间的临近，时钟检查的次数增加。虽然基于时间的任务可能更难完成，但它们似乎不会像非焦点 PM 任务那样对正在进行的任务造成速度成本。
