Retrieval cue and delay interval influence the relationship between prospective memory and activities of daily living in older adults

ABSTRACT

Objective: Older adults commonly experience mild declines in everyday functioning and the strategic aspects of prospective memory (PM). This study used multiprocess theory to examine whether the strategic demands of retrieval cue type (event vs. time based) and delay interval length (2 vs. 15 min) influence the relationship between PM and activities of daily living (ADLs) in older adults. Method: Participants included 97 community-dwelling older adults recruited from the Western Australia Participant Pool. Participants were administered the Memory for Intentions Screening Test (MIST) and Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ) as part of a larger neurocognitive assessment. A knowledgeable informant completed the Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (ADLQ), from which a cutpoint of ≥1 was used to classify participants into “ADL normal” (n = 37) or “mild ADL problems” (n = 60) groups. Repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) controlling for age was conducted with ADL group as the between-subjects factor and either MIST or PRMQ cue and delay scores as the within-subjects factors. Results: We observed a significant ADL group by PM interaction on the MIST, with pair-wise analyses showing that the mild ADL problems group performed worse than ADL normal participants on the 15-min time-based scale (p < .001, Cohen’s d = 0.71). No other MIST or PRMQ cue–delay variable differed between the two ADL groups (ps > .10). Conclusion: Findings indicate that decrements in strategically demanding cue monitoring and detection over longer PM delays may partly explain older adults’ mild problems in everyday functioning. Findings may inform neuropsychological interventions aimed at maintaining ADL independence and enhancing quality of life in older adults.

KEYWORDS:

• Prospective memory
• activities of daily living
• aging

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the study volunteers for their participation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Health [grant number R01-MH073419 to S. P. Woods]. The authors report no conflicts of interest. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, the Department of Defense, or the United States Government.