Age- and task-setting-related performance predictions in prospective memory: Can metacognition explain the age-prospective memory paradox?

This study explored the role of metacognition in the so-called "age-prospective memory (PM) paradox" by investigating the accuracy of younger and older adults' predictions of their future PM performance in time-based tasks performed across laboratory and naturalistic settings. Metacognitive monitoring was assessed by asking participants to make judgments-of-learning (JOLs) on an item level for both the prospective (remembering that something has to be done) and retrospective (remembering what to do) components of PM. In terms of PM performance, the results for the prospective component revealed an age deficit in the laboratory-based task and an age benefit in the naturalistic task, in line with the age-PM paradox. In terms of metacognition, important age differences were found across settings. In particular, the results pointed to poor resolution of JOLs made by older adults in the laboratory and by younger adults in the naturalistic setting. This suggests that younger and older participants could not discriminate between items they would later hit or miss but did so in different settings. Furthermore, although both age groups exhibited overconfidence in the naturalistic setting, this bias was significantly stronger for the younger adults. This might explain the observed differences in performance. That is, the advantage older adults have in naturalistic tasks may stem from a better ability to predict performance in this setting compared to younger adults, who tend instead to heavily overestimate their capabilities and may therefore not engage in appropriate strategies or planning. These findings speak to the functional relevance of metacognitive monitoring processes for PM performance and suggest considering metacognition as a key factor in explaining the age-PM paradox.