» Articles » PMID: 26322551

Age Differences in the Focus of Retrieval: Evidence from Dual-list Free Recall

Overview
Journal Psychol Aging
Specialty Geriatrics
Date 2015 Sep 1
PMID 26322551
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In the present experiment, we examined age differences in the focus of retrieval using a dual-list free recall paradigm. Younger and older adults studied 2 lists of unrelated words and recalled from the first list, the second list, or both lists. Older adults showed impaired use of control processes to recall items correctly from a target list and prevent intrusions. This pattern reflected a deficit in recollection verified using a process dissociation procedure. We examined the consequences of an age-related deficit in control processes on the focus of retrieval using measures of temporal organization. Evidence that older adults engaged a broader focus of retrieval than younger adults was shown clearly when participants were instructed to recall from both lists. First-recalled items originated from more distant positions across lists for older adults. We interpret older adults' broader retrieval orientation as consistent with their impaired ability to elaborate cues to constrain retrieval. These findings show that age-related deficits in control processes impair context reinstatement and the subsequent focus of retrieval to target episodes.

Citing Articles

The influence of emotion on temporal context models.

Lohnas L, Howard M Cogn Emot. 2024; 39(1):18-46.

PMID: 39007902 PMC: 11733071. DOI: 10.1080/02699931.2024.2371075.


The drawing effect: Evidence for costs and benefits using pure and mixed lists.

Huff M, Namias J, Poe P Mem Cognit. 2024; 52(6):1408-1421.

PMID: 38519781 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-024-01551-6.


Semantic associations restore neural encoding mechanisms.

Moore I, Long N Learn Mem. 2024; 31(3).

PMID: 38503491 PMC: 11000581. DOI: 10.1101/lm.053996.124.


Adult age differences in subjective context retrieval in dual-list free recall.

Garlitch S, Richmond L, Ball B, Wahlheim C Memory. 2022; 31(2):218-233.

PMID: 36308518 PMC: 9992089. DOI: 10.1080/09658211.2022.2139846.


Differential effects of proactive and retroactive interference in value-directed remembering for younger and older adults.

Murphy D, Castel A Psychol Aging. 2022; 37(7):787-799.

PMID: 36048043 PMC: 10029347. DOI: 10.1037/pag0000707.


References
1.
Anderson M, Spellman B . On the status of inhibitory mechanisms in cognition: memory retrieval as a model case. Psychol Rev. 1995; 102(1):68-100. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.102.1.68. View

2.
Balota D, Duchek J, Paullin R . Age-related differences in the impact of spacing, lag, and retention interval. Psychol Aging. 1989; 4(1):3-9. DOI: 10.1037//0882-7974.4.1.3. View

3.
Zacks J, Speer N, Vettel J, Jacoby L . Event understanding and memory in healthy aging and dementia of the Alzheimer type. Psychol Aging. 2006; 21(3):466-82. DOI: 10.1037/0882-7974.21.3.466. View

4.
Jacoby L, Wahlheim C, Kelley C . Memory consequences of looking back to notice change: Retroactive and proactive facilitation. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2015; 41(5):1282-97. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000123. View

5.
West R, Murphy K, Armilio M, Craik F, Stuss D . Lapses of intention and performance variability reveal age-related increases in fluctuations of executive control. Brain Cogn. 2002; 49(3):402-19. DOI: 10.1006/brcg.2001.1507. View