Data set for "Age differences in prospective memory: a further evaluation of the executive framework

Published: 04-09-2019| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/2j9t6p5m3d.1
Joseph Maes


In this study, a group of children (7−9 years; N = 108), adolescents (12−14 years; N = 112), and adults (17−23 years; N = 106) performed focal- and non-focal event-based prospective memory (EBPM) tasks, a time-based prospective memory (TBPM) task, and tasks measuring components of executive functioning, specifically working memory (running memory tasks differing in stimulus presentation time), response inhibition (go/no-go task), interference control (Stroop Color-Word task and flanker task), and task-switching ability (magnitude/parity judgment switching task). From these tasks, diverse standard performance (outcome) measures were derived, such as proportion of trials with a correct response, mean response times (RTs), interference scores (e.g., difference between RTs on incongruent and congruent trials), and switch cost (see target article for details). These outcome measures were used in analyses of variance, simple correlational, hierarchical regression, and mediation analyses to examine the predictive value of performance on the executive function tasks for explaining (age-related) performance differences on each of the three types of prospective memory task. The mediation analyses were performed focussing both on differences in prospective memory performances between and within the age groups. The between-age differences in focal EBPM and TBPM performance were mediated by tasks measuring working memory and/or inhibition. However, the within-age-group analyses only revealed working memory as significant mediator of TBPM performance in the adolescent group. Hence, which specific executive functions underlie age-related differences in prospective memory performances is importantly dependent on which specific age group(s) are examined. For each participant, the SPSS data file shows the corresponding gender, age, accuracy scores (proportion correct/incorrect responses) and/or mean RTs for the different tasks and outcome measures. The meaning of the columns is briefly described under variable viewlabel.