Trial-by-trial Changes Of Task Interference Of Prospective Memory

The most important thing is the retrieval of intentions, if PM task would be implemented successfully, it means that the executive intentions should be rise to our consciousness and be implemented smoothly. There are still some debates about whether or not the retrieval of intentions is spontaneous or a down-top attentional control processes driven by stimulus, according to multi-process theory on the retrieval of prospective executive intentions.Nevertheless, some researchers still argue that a preparatory statue engaged for monitoring the occurrence of prospective targets across the entire PM phrase, the views on the retrieval of intentions based on Preparatory Attentional and Memory Processes Theory. It can be concluded that much studies has therefore focused on examining task interference as a way to investigate whether PM retrieval must relay on resource-demanding monitoring processes, of interest here are few studies to date that focus on cost of cognitive resources and features of task interference over PM task. Whether there are differences between our current study and previous studies on the point the cost of cognitive resource by manipulations of associating ongoing task and PM tasks.We apply duel-task paradigm in current study including ongoing task and PM task, we also examined effects of trial by trial changes in whether the context was relevant to PM task, it means that if stimulus’ s color matched with PM targets, we defined it as color-matched condition, likewise, if didn’t match, which defined as color-mismatched condition. Ongoing task require participants to decide as quickly and accurately as possible whether the word presenting in the centre of the screen is a word by pressing the “F” key with their left index finger if the non-word was present, and the “J” key with their right index finger. In the PM phrase, participants were told that, in addition to performing ongoing task, if the word was a certain color(white or black) and one of specified 5 words(茅、萝、茸、葫、芦),they should press space bar as a response to it. Noted that, the color of word would change randomly or every eight word(random vs blocked conditions respectively).We examined whether having a PM task affected the accuracy of performing ongoing task by 3(condition:control, random, blocked×2( phrase : baseline, PM) mixed ANOVA with condition as the between-subjects factor and phrase as the within-subjects factor. The results suggested that there was no main effect and interaction involving condition. Proportion correct was very high in both phrase of task. Finally, there was no cost of performing PM task in terms of accuracy on the ongoing task.We examined how randomizing versus blocking the presentation of stimuli associated with a intention affects the speed performing the ongoing task by a 2(condition:random, blocked)×2(lures:present, absent×2(phrase:baseline, PM)×2(color:match, mismatch)mixed ANOVA. These results show that there was significant task interference, such that RTs were longer when participants were performing a PM task than when they were not. RTs were also longer for color match than color mismatch trials, and more so in the blocked than in the random condition. Phase interacted with color, suggesting that task interference from adding a PM task was higher for color match than for color mismatch trials. The three-way interaction between phase, color, and condition was significant, such that the greater task interference for match than mismatch trials was much more evident in the blocked than in the random condition. In addition to these highly significant effects, there were also two weaker interactions involving lures such that the greater task interference for match than mismatch trials was less evident in the presence than in the absence of lures.But does presentation of intention irrelevant stimuli in a predictable, blocked fashion reduce cost for these trials relative to random presentation? A mixed 2×2×2(Condition× Lures ×Phase) ANOVA was conducted for RTs in color mismatch trials, the slowing that resulted from adding a PM task was greater in the random than in the blocked condition, for the condition by phase interaction. A mixed 2×2×2(Condition ×Lures ×Phase) ANOVA was conducted for RTs in color match trials, The condition by phase interaction was significant, as task interference was greater in the blocked than in the random condition. This suggests that more attentional resources were engaged for the processing of intention-relevant stimuli when presentation was blocked than when it was random. The three-way interaction was not significant.RTs for color mismatch trials were submitted to a mixed 2×2×8(Lures ×Phase ×Trial) ANOVA. Critically there was a significant phase by trial interaction, suggesting that the amount of resources recruited towards intention processing changed as a function of the trial location in the sequence of intention-irrelevant trials.We examined lure interference in a 2×2 ANOVA that included condition(random, blocked) and lures(present, absent) as the between-subjects factors. This revealed a main effect of lures, such that slowing was observed for lures but not for lure controls. Although lure interference was numerically greater for lures in the random than in the blocked condition, but similar for lure controls, the interaction between condition and lures was not significant.