The Effect Of Cognitive Style And Attention Level On Prospective Memory

This research discussed the question of how cognitive style,attention level and task type affected prospective memory and the question of how cognitive style,attention level affected TAP effect.This reseach included three experiments following the experimental paradigm.Experiment 1 focused the effect of attention level and cognitve style on event-based PM and time-based PM,which adopted the experimental design of 2(cognitive style:FD;FI)×2(attention level:focused attention;divided attention)×2(type of PM:event-based;time-based)mixed factorial design that included the between-subjects variables of cognitive style and attention level, and within-subjects variables of the type of PM. Experiment 2:the task process of PM was perceptual,and adopted 2(cognitive style:FD;FI)×2(attention level:focused attention;divided attention)×2(relation of PM task and ongoing task process type:matched;dismatched) mixed factorial design that included the between-subjects variables of cognitive style and attention level, and within-subjects variables of the relation of PM task and ongoing task process type;Experiment 3:the task process of PM is semantic,and adopted 2(cognitive style:FD;FI)×2(attention level:focused attention;divided attention)×2(relation of PM task and ongoing task process type:matched;dismatched)mixed factorial design that included the between-subjects variables of cognitive style and attention level, and within-subjects variables of the relation of PM task and ongoing task process type. The results indicated:1.FI subjects performed better than FD subjects. FI subjects performed significantly better than FD subjects in event-based PM and there was not significant difference in time-based PM. FI subjects performed significantly better than FD subjects in the condition of dismatched relation of PM task and ongoing task process type and there was not significant difference in the condition of matched relation.2.The performance of the event-based PM was performed significantly better than time-based PM at both FI subjects and FD subjects and both attention levels.3.The scores on focused attention performed better than divided attention.There was not the attention level effect in time-based PM; while there was in event-based PM, the scores on focused attention performed significantly better than divided attention.When the process type of PM was semantic, the scores on focused attention performed significantly better than divided attention on the condition of matched relation of PM task and ongoing task process type while there was not significant difference between focused attention and divided attention on the condition of dismatched relation.4.There was TAP effect when process type of PM were both semantic and perceptual.There was TAP effect on both FI subjects and FD subjects and FD subjects strengthened TAP effect.There was TAP effect on both focused attention and divided attention,and divided attention strengthened TAP effect.