Functions of External Cues in Prospective Memory

Vortac, O. U.; Edwards, Mark B.; Manning, Carol A. · 1995 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1080/09658219508258966

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the cognitive functions of external cues in prospective memory, specifically determining whether such cues primarily support the rehearsal of action content during a retention interval or the retrieval of that content at the time of execution. The research was motivated by impending automation in air traffic control, where traditional paper flight progress strips—used by controllers as external memory aids—would be replaced by electronic displays. Understanding how controllers utilize these cues is critical for designing effective human-computer interfaces that maintain safety and efficiency. The researchers conducted two experiments using a modified FAA Air Traffic Scenario Test simulation. Participants controlled aircraft traffic while managing prospective memory tasks: remembering to execute specific altitude or destination changes for certain aircraft after a delay. The study manipulated the temporal availability of the external cue (the electronic strip displaying the command) to disentangle rehearsal from retrieval. Four conditions were tested: "Both" (cue visible throughout retention and at execution), "Retrieval-only" (cue visible only at execution), "Rehearsal-only" (cue visible during retention but removed before execution), and "Neither" (cue visible only briefly at encoding, then absent). Experiment 1 used a within-subjects design, while Experiment 2 used a between-subjects design to allow participants to optimize strategies for a single condition. Performance was measured by the accuracy of sending aircraft to their correct changed destinations. The results from both experiments converged on the same conclusion: the primary function of the external cue was to support retrieval, not rehearsal. In both studies, performance in the "Both" and "Retrieval-only" conditions was significantly higher than in the "Rehearsal-only" and "Neither" conditions, with no significant difference between the "Both" and "Retrieval-only" groups. Conversely, the "Rehearsal-only" condition performed no better than the "Neither" condition, indicating that having the cue visible during the retention interval provided no benefit if it was not available at the moment of action. These findings held true regardless of whether participants could tailor their strategies to the specific cue availability. Additionally, the manipulations did not affect the latency of triggering the action, suggesting that the cue's role in content memory was distinct from its role in triggering the action itself. The significance of these findings lies in their implications for the design of automated air traffic control systems. The study suggests that electronic prospective cues must be visible at the time the action can be executed to be effective. Merely displaying information during the retention interval does not aid memory performance. Therefore, interface designs should prioritize the timely presentation of relevant data at the point of execution rather than relying on persistent displays to support mental rehearsal. This ensures that automation supports, rather than hinders, the prospective memory processes essential for safe air traffic control.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• prospective memory interruptions