Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Assessing prospective memory beyond experimental tasks

Nature Reviews Neurology volume 17, page 459 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

We read with great interest the Review by Henry on prospective memory (PM) impairment in neurological disorders (Henry, J. D. Prospective memory impairment in neurological disorders: implications and management. Nat. Rev. Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00472-1 (2021))1. The author outlines the frequent occurrence of PM impairments in various neurological disorders, with a focus on PM assessment. Specifically, the author proposes that “self-report measures often correlate weakly with objective assessments” and “single-item PM tests have lower reliability and sensitivity than clinical batteries.”

Recent literature reviews have highlighted the flaws of clinical batteries and emphasized the relevance of questionnaires and single-item PM tests. In a systematic and meta-analytic review of PM assessment tools2, Blondelle and colleagues highlighted the lack of standardized neuropsychological evaluation in clinical practice. The authors showed that many PM tools lacked normative data, cut-off scores for diagnostic purposes, qualitative scoring, parallel versions and/or ecological validity. Although translated versions of some tools exist, there is a distinct lack of cultural adaptation in non-WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic) populations3, and progress in this area will rely on following specific guidelines for test development4. Performance-based measures (so-called objective assessments) are valuable for clinical practice, but we should not forget the work needed to make these tools available and relevant to each patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Henry, J. D. Prospective memory impairment in neurological disorders: implications and management. Nat. Rev. Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00472-1 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Blondelle, G., Hainselin, M., Gounden, Y. & Quaglino, V. Instruments measuring prospective memory: a systematic and meta-analytic review. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 35, 576–596 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J. & Norenzayan, A. Most people are not WEIRD. Nature 466, 29 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association, 2014).

  5. Huppert, F. A., Johnson, T. & Nickson, J. High prevalence of prospective memory impairment in the elderly and in early-stage dementia: findings from a population-based study. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 14, S63–S81 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lee, S. et al. The contribution of prospective memory performance to the neuropsychological assessment of mild cognitive impairment. Clin. Neuropsychol. 30, 131–149 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sugden, N., Thomas, M. & Kiernan, M. A scoping review of the utility of self-report and informant-report prospective memory measures. Neuropsychol. Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2021.1875851 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dennis, M., Nelson, R., Jewell, D. & Fletcher, J. M. Prospective memory in adults with spina bifida. Childs Nerv. Syst. 26, 1749–1755 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hainselin, M. et al. Can we remember future actions yet forget the last two minutes? Study in transient global amnesia. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23, 4138–4149 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CRP-CPO, UR UPJV 7273, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France

    Mathieu Hainselin, Yannick Gounden & Geoffrey Blondelle

Authors
  1. Mathieu Hainselin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yannick Gounden
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Geoffrey Blondelle
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mathieu Hainselin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hainselin, M., Gounden, Y. & Blondelle, G. Assessing prospective memory beyond experimental tasks. Nat Rev Neurol 17, 459 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00499-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-021-00499-4

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing