I could do it now, but I'd rather (forget to) do it later: examining links between procrastination and prospective memory failures.

Prospective memory (PM) represents the ability to remember to perform planned actions after a certain delay. As previous studies suggest that even brief task-delays can negatively affect PM performance, the current study set out to examine whether procrastination (intentionally delaying task execution despite possible negative consequences) may represent a factor contributing to PM failures. Specifically, we assessed procrastination (via a standardized questionnaire as well as an objective behavioral measure) and PM failures (via a naturalistic PM task) in 92 young adults. Results show that participants' self-reports as well as their actual procrastination behavior predicted the number of PM failures, corroborating the impact of procrastination on PM. Subsequent cluster analyses suggest three distinct procrastination profiles (non-procrastinators, conscious procrastinators and unconscious procrastinators), providing new conceptual insights into different mechanisms of how procrastinating may lead to forgetting to perform planned tasks.

Do self-reports of procrastination predict actual behavior?

OBJECTIVES: Procrastination is typically assessed via self-report questionnaires. So far, only very few studies have examined actual procrastination behavior, providing inconclusive results regarding the real-life validity of self-reports in this domain. The present study aimed to examine for the first time whether participants' self-reported procrastination can predict their actual behavior on a real-life task. METHODS: For that purpose, we assessed self-reported levels of procrastination [via the Pure Procrastination Scale, PPS] and actual procrastination behavior on a naturalistic task [i.e., having to send in an attendance sheet before a deadline] in 93 participants. RESULTS: Results show that self-reports significantly predicted procrastination behavior. Analyses of underlying dimensions suggest that real-life procrastination can be the result of "voluntarily delaying planned actions," but can also have more passive causes such as "running out of time." CONCLUSIONS: Comparing our results with the available literature suggests that PPS self-reports reflect a particularly valid tool to assess real-life procrastination behavior. Findings are discussed in the context of strategies and mechanisms that potential interventions may target in order to reduce procrastination.

Prospective Memory Predictions in Aging: Increased Overconfidence in Older Adults.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated whether young and older adults can predict their future performance on an event-based prospective memory (PM) task. METHODS: Metacognitive awareness was assessed by asking participants to give judgments-of-learning (JOLs) on an item-level for the prospective (remembering that something has to be done) and retrospective (remembering what to do) PM component. In addition, to explore possible age differences in the ability to adapt predictions to the difficulty of the task, encoding time and the relatedness between the prospective and the retrospective PM component were varied. RESULTS: Results revealed that both age groups were sensitive to our task manipulations and adapted their predictions appropriately. Moreover, item-level JOLs indicated that for the retrospective component, young and older adults were equally accurate and slightly overconfident. For the prospective component, predictions were fairly accurate in young adults, while older adults were overconfident. Thus, results suggest that general overconfidence is increased in older adults and concerns both components of PM. DISCUSSION: Findings regarding the conceptual differences between the prospective and retrospective components of a PM task, as well as the link between aging and metamemory in PM are discussed.

Laboratory vs. naturalistic prospective memory task predictions: young adults are overconfident outside of the laboratory.

This study investigated whether individuals can predict their future prospective memory (PM) performance in a lab-based task and in a naturalistic task. Metacognitive awareness was assessed by asking participants to give judgments-of-learning (JOLs) on an item-level for the prospective (that something has to be done) and retrospective (what to do) PM component. In addition, to explore whether giving predictions influences PM performance, we compared a control group (without predictions) to a prediction group. Results revealed that giving predictions did not change PM performance. Moreover, participants were underconfident in their PM performance in the lab-based task, while they were overconfident in the naturalistic task. In addition, item-level JOLs indicated that they were inaccurate in predicting what items they will recall or not, but only for the prospective component of the PM task. As for the retrospective component, they were equally accurate in both task settings. This study suggests a dissociation of metacognitive awareness for PM according to both task setting and processing component.