Mechanisms of commission errors in aftereffects of completed intentions

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.0600

Abstract

Abstract:

Aftereffects of completed intentions refer to participants continue retrieving intentions interfering with current cognitive tasks, after their failures in deactivating completed or cancelled intentions. Recent studies investigated the related factors and cognitive mechanisms in prospective memory task paradigm. Spontaneous retrieval and preparatory monitoring retrieval diverge in whether the retrieval process depends on attentional resources. Brain imaging research also showed that there are two neural pathways for intention retrieval. Further studies are necessary to explore effective approaches to reduce commission errors, and develop a new paradigm including three aspects of aftereffects of completed intentions, which are failures in intentional forgetting, retrieval of completed intentions and failures in inhibition.

Key words: aftereffects of completed intentions, commission errors, cognitive mechanisms, attentional resources, neural mechanisms

CLC Number:

B842

Huan HUANG, Bo LIU, Chenchen ZHOU, Ming JI. Mechanisms of commission errors in aftereffects of completed intentions[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(9): 1600-1607.

References

1	卢焕华, 王岩, 郭春彦 . ( 2010). 从ERP研究看前瞻记忆的神经基础和认知加工机制. 心理科学进展, 18( 3), 426-431.
2	卢家楣, 孙俊才, 刘伟 . ( 2008). 诱发负性情绪时人际情绪调节与个体情绪调节对前瞻记忆的影响. 心理学报, 40( 12), 1258-1265.
3	Anderson, F. T., & Einstein, G. O. ( 2017). The fate of completed intentions. Memory, 25( 4), 467-480.
4	Beck S. M., Ruge H., Walser M., & Goschke T. ( 2014). The functional neuroanatomy of spontaneous retrieval and strategic monitoring of delayed intentions. Neuropsychologia, 52, 37-50.
5	Bugg, J. M., & Scullin, M. K. ( 2013). Controlling intentions: The surprising ease of stopping after going relative to stopping after never having gone. Psychological Science, 24( 12), 2463-2471.
6	Bugg J. M., Scullin M. K., & McDaniel M. A. ( 2013). Strengthening encoding via implementation intention formation increases prospective memory commission errors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20( 3), 522-527.
7	Bugg J. M., Scullin M. K., & Rauvola R. S. ( 2016). Forgetting no-longer-relevant prospective memory intentions is (sometimes) harder with age but easier with forgetting practice. Psychology and Aging, 31( 4), 358-369.
8	Burgess P. W., Dumontheil I., & Gilbert S. J. ( 2007). The gateway hypothesis of rostral prefrontal cortex (area 10) function. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11( 7), 290-298.
9	Burgess P. W., Gonen-Yaacovi G., & Volle E. ( 2011). Functional neuroimaging studies of prospective memory: What have we learnt so far? Neuropsychologia, 49( 8), 2246-2257.
10	Cohen A.-L., Dixon R. A., & Lindsay D. S. ( 2005). The intention interference effect and aging: Similar magnitude of effects for young and old adults. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19( 9), 1177-1197.
11	Cohen A.-L., Kantner J., Dixon R. A., & Lindsay D. S. ( 2011). The intention interference effect: The difficulty of ignoring what you intend to do. Experimental Psychology, 58( 6), 425-433.
12	Cona G., Bisiacchi P. S., Sartori G., & Scarpazza C. ( 2016). Effects of cue focality on the neural mechanisms of prospective memory: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Scientific Reports, 6, 25983.
13	Cona G., Scarpazza C., Sartori G., Moscovitch M., & Bisiacchi P. S. ( 2015). Neural bases of prospective memory: A meta-analysis and the "Attention to Delayed Intention" (AtoDI) model. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 52, 21-37.
14	Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. ( 2002). Control of goal- directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3( 3), 201-215.
15	Einstein G. O., McDaniel M. A., Thomas R., Mayfield S., Shank H., Morrisette N., & Breneiser J. ( 2005). Multiple processes in prospective memory retrieval: Factors determining monitoring versus spontaneous retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134( 3), 327-342.
16	Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. ( 2017). Unity and diversity of executive functions: Individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex, 86, 186-204.
17	Gollwitzer, P. M. ( 1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54( 7), 493-503.
18	Goschke, T., & Kuhl, J. ( 1993). Representation of intentions: Persisting activation in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19( 5), 1211-1226.
19	Harris, L. M., & Cumming, S. R. ( 2003). An examination of the relationship between anxiety and performance on prospective and retrospective memory tasks. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55( 1), 51-55.
20	Leech, R., & Sharp, D. J. ( 2014). The role of the posterior cingulate cortex in cognition and disease. Brain, 137( 1), 12-32.
21	Lustig C., Hasher L., & Zacks R. T. ( 2007). Inhibitory deficit theory: Recent developments in a "new view". In D. S. Gorfein & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), The place of inhibition in cognition ( pp. 145-162). Washington: American Psychological Association.
22	Marsh R. L., Hicks J. L., & Bink M. L. ( 1998). Activation of completed, uncompleted, and partially completed intentions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24( 2), 350-361.
23	McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. ( 2011). The neuropsychology of prospective memory in normal aging: A componential approach. Neuropsychologia, 49( 8), 2147-2155.
24	McDaniel M. A., LaMontagne P., Beck S. M., Scullin M. K., & Braver T. S. ( 2013). Dissociable neural routes to successful prospective memory. Psychological Science, 24( 9), 1791-1800.
25	McDaniel, M. A., & Scullin, M. K. ( 2010). Implementation intention encoding does not automatize prospective memory responding. Memory & Cognition, 38( 2), 221-232.
26	Moscovitch, M. ( 1994). Memory and working with memory: Evaluation of a component process model and comparisons with other models. In D. L. Schacter & E. Tulving (Eds.), Memory systems (pp. 269-310). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27	Mullet H. G., Scullin M. K., Hess T. J., Scullin R. B., Arnold K. M., & Einstein G. O. ( 2013). Prospective memory and aging: Evidence for preserved spontaneous retrieval with exact but not related cues. Psychology and Aging, 28( 4), 910-922.
28	Penningroth, S. L. ( 2011). When does the intention- superiority effect occur? Activation patterns before and after task completion, and moderating variables. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23( 1), 140-156.
29	Pink, J. E., & Dodson, C. S. ( 2013). Negative prospective memory: Remembering not to perform an action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20( 1), 184-190.
30	Schaper, P., & Grundgeiger, T. ( 2017). Commission errors in delay-execute prospective memory tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70( 8), 1423-1438.
31	Scullin, M. K., & Bugg, J. M. ( 2013). Failing to forget: Prospective memory commission errors can result from spontaneous retrieval and impaired executive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39( 3), 965-971.
32	Scullin M. K., Bugg J. M., & McDaniel M. A. ( 2012). Whoops, I did it again: Commission errors in prospective memory. Psychology and Aging, 27( 1), 46-53.
33	Scullin M. K., Bugg J. M., McDaniel M. A., & Einstein G. O. ( 2011). Prospective memory and aging: Preserved spontaneous retrieval, but impaired deactivation in older adults. Memory & Cognition, 39( 7), 1232-1240.
34	Scullin M. K., Einstein G. O., & McDaniel M. A. ( 2009). Evidence for spontaneous retrieval of suspended but not finished prospective memories. Memory & Cognition, 37( 4), 425-433.
35	Seeley W. W., Menon V., Schatzberg A. F., Keller J., Glover G. H., Kenna H., … Greicius M. D. ( 2007). Dissociable intrinsic connectivity networks for salience processing and executive control. Journal of Neuroscience, 27( 9), 2349-2356.
36	Shenhav A., Botvinick M. M., & Cohen J. D. ( 2013). The Expected value of control: An integrative theory of anterior cingulate cortex function. Neuron, 79( 2), 217-240.
37	Smith, R. E. ( 2003). The cost of remembering to remember in event-based prospective memory: Investigating the capacity demands of delayed intention performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29( 3), 347-361.
38	Walser M., Fischer R., & Goschke T. ( 2012). The failure of deactivating intentions: Aftereffects of completed intentions in the repeated prospective memory cue paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38( 4), 1030-1044.
39	Walser M., Goschke T., & Fischer R. ( 2014). The difficulty of letting go: Moderators of the deactivation of completed intentions. Psychological Research, 78( 4), 574-583.
40	Walser M., Goschke T., Möschl M., & Fischer R. ( 2017). Intention deactivation: Effects of prospective memory task similarity on aftereffects of completed intentions. Psychological Research, 81( 5), 961-981.
41	Walser M., Plessow F., Goschke T., & Fischer R. ( 2014). The role of temporal delay and repeated prospective memory cue exposure on the deactivation of completed intentions. Psychological Research, 78( 4), 584-596.

[1]	ZHANG Mingxia, LI Yuxin, LI Jin, LIU Xun. The influence of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on memory in adolescents and the underlying neural mechanisms [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2023, 31(1): 1-9.
[2]	WANG Songxue, CHENG Si, JIANG Ting, LIU Xun, ZHANG Mingxia. The effect of external rewards on declarative memory [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2023, 31(1): 78-86.
[3]	LI Liang, LI Hong. Cognitive mechanism and neural basis of shyness [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(5): 1038-1049.
[4]	LI Hehui, HUANG Huiya, DONG Lin, LUO Yuejia, TAO Wuhai. Developmental dyslexia and cerebellar abnormalities: Multiple roles of the cerebellum and causal relationships between the two [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(2): 343-353.
[5]	HU Jia-Bao, LEI Yang, DING Xian-Feng, CHENG Xiao-Rong, FAN Zhao. Shared vs. private aesthetic tastes: The cognitive and neural mechanisms [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(2): 354-364.
[6]	LIU Wang-Juan, DING Xian-Feng, CHENG Xiao-Rong, FAN Zhao. Serial dependence effect: A novel “history effect” [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(10): 2228-2239.
[7]	GAN Jiaqun, WANG Enguo. Attentional disengagement in autism spectrum disorders [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(1): 129-140.
[8]	LI Aimei, CHE Jingshang, LIU Nan, SUN Hailong, ZHOU Wei. How does massive information affect intertemporal choice? A theoretical perspective based on attentional resources [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2021, 29(9): 1521-1533.
[9]	GUO Ying, GONG Xianmin, WANG Dahua. The cognitive and neural mechanisms underlying false memory: An information processing perspective [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2021, 29(1): 79-92.
[10]	YANG Xiaomeng, WANG Fuxing, WANG Yanqing, ZHAO Tingting, GAO Chunying, HU Xiangen. Are pupils the window of our mind? Pupil-related application in psychology and pupillometry [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(7): 1029-1041.
[11]	ZHANG Jingjing, LIANG Xiaoyue, CHEN Yidi, CHEN Qingrong. The cognitive mechanism of music syntactic processing and the influence of music structure on its processing [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(6): 883-892.
[12]	WANG Xin, HANG Mingli, LIANG Dandan. The cognitive neural mechanisms of verb argument structure complexity processing [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(1): 62-74.
[13]	WEI Tongqi, CAO Hui, BI Hong-Yan, YANG Yang. Writing deficits in developmental dyslexia and its neural mechanisms [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(1): 75-84.
[14]	CHEN Xiaowen, CAI Wenshu, XIE Tong, FU Shimin. The characteristics and neural mechanisms of visual orienting and visual search in autism spectrum disorders [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(1): 98-109.
[15]	CHEN ShengDong, CHEN YongQiang, GAO Wei, LUO Li, YANG JieMin, YUAN JiaJin. The automaticity in cognitive processing: From dichotomy to gradual view [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(9): 1556-1563.