Abstract
The failure to forget a completed prospective memory intention, which is known as an aftereffect of prospective memory (PM), can have a negative impact on individuals. The underlying mechanism of this phenomenon—whether it stems from a resource-dependent top-down monitoring process or a resource-independent bottom-up spontaneous retrieval process—remains unclear. The focality of PM cues refers to the classification of a PM task as either “focal” or “non-focal”—a key factor that may influence whether monitoring is required for processing. This study employed event-related potential (ERP) technology to investigate the activation state and temporal dynamics of intentions following the completion of a PM task. By analyzing the influence of cue focality on PM aftereffects, we aimed to evaluate the strategic monitoring and automatic processing theories. Consistency between behavioral and ERP findings revealed that completed PM intentions remain activated (resulting in aftereffects) rather than being deactivated. Nonetheless, the behavioral and ERP data did not show differential impacts of focal versus non-focal cues on PM aftereffects. Both experimental groups demonstrated a significant number of commission errors and ongoing task interference compared to the control group. Additionally, an enhanced amplitude of the prospective positive wave—associated with PM cue retrieval—was observed in the parieto-occipital region during the 400–600 ms post-stimulus interval. These findings suggest that PM aftereffects are underpinned by a strategic monitoring process that requires attentional resources, irrespective of the focality of PM cues.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets analyzed during the current study are available through the link: https://www.scidb.cn/en/anonymous/TjNVdm1h.
References
Anderson FT, Einstein GO (2017) The fate of completed intentions. Memory 25(4):467–480
Ballhausen N, Hering A, Rendell PG, Kliegel M (2019) Prospective memory across the lifespan. In: Prospective memory. Routledge, p 135–156
Beck SM, Ruge H, Walser M, Goschke T (2014) The functional neuroanatomy of spontaneous retrieval and strategic monitoring of delayed intentions. Neuropsychologia 52:37–50
Bugg JM, Scullin MK (2013) Controlling intentions: the surprising ease of stopping after going relative to stopping after never having gone. Psychol Sci 24(12):2463–2471
Bugg JM, Scullin MK, Rauvola RS (2016) Forgetting no-longer-relevant prospective memory intentions is (sometimes) harder with age but easier with forgetting practice. Psychol Aging 31(4):358
Chen Y (2022) The influence of cue characteristics on the aftereffect of prospective memory intention: the moderating effect of cognitive resources. Dissertation, Shanghai Normal University
Cohen AL, Hicks JL (2017) Output monitoring of intention execution. Springer, Cham, pp 61–79
Cona G, Arcara G, Tarantino V, Bisiacchi PS (2012) Electrophysiological correlates of strategic monitoring in event-based and time-based prospective memory. PLoS ONE 7(2):e31659
Cona G, Bisiacchi PS, Moscovitch M (2014) The effects of focal and nonfocal cues on the neural correlates of prospective memory: insights from ERPs. Cereb Cortex 24(10):2630–2646
Cona G, Bisiacchi PS, Sartori G, Scarpazza C (2016) Effects of cue focality on the neural mechanisms of prospective memory: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Sci Rep 6(1):25983
Cona G, Chiossi F, Di Tomasso S, Pellegrino G, Piccione F, Bisiacchi P, Arcara G (2020) Theta and alpha oscillations as signatures of internal and external attention to delayed intentions: a magnetoencephalography (MEG) study. Neuroimage 205:116295
Cottini M, Meier B (2020) Prospective memory monitoring and aftereffects of deactivated intentions across the lifespan. Cog Dev 53:100844
Cousens R, Cutmore T, Wang Y, Wilson J, Chan RC, Shum DH (2015) Effects of perceptual and semantic cues on ERP modulations associated with prospective memory. Int J Psychophysiol 98(1):151–156
Eimer M, Kiss M, Press C, Sauter D (2009) The roles of feature-specific task set and bottom-up salience in attentional capture: an ERP study. J Exp Psychol Hum 35(5):1316
Einstein GO, McDaniel MA (2005) Prospective memory: multiple retrieval processes. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 14(6):286–290
Harrison TL, Mullet HG, Whiffen KN, Ousterhout H, Einstein GO (2014) Prospective memory: effects of divided attention on spontaneous retrieval. Mem Cogn 42(2):212–224
Hering A, Kliegel M, Rendell PG, Craik FIM, Rose NS (2018) Prospective memory is a key predictor of functional independence in older adults. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 24(6):640–645
Knight JB, Ethridge LE, Marsh RL, Clementz BA (2010) Neural correlates of attentional and mnemonic processing in event-based prospective memory. Front Hum Neurosci 4:960
McDaniel MA, Einstein GO (2000) Strategic and automatic processes in prospective memory retrieval: a multiprocess framework. Appl Cogn Psych 14(7):S127–S144
Meier B, Cottini M (2022) After-effects of responding to activated and deactivated prospective memory target events differ depending on processing overlaps. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 49(3):389–406
Möschl M, Fischer R, Bugg JM, Scullin MK, Goschke T, Walser M (2020) Aftereffects and deactivation of completed prospective memory intentions: a systematic review. Psychol Bull 146(3):245
Moyes J, Sari-Sarraf N, Gilbert SJ (2019) Characterising monitoring processes in event-based prospective memory: evidence from pupillometry. Cognition 184:83–95
Mullet HG, Scullin MK, Hess TJ, Scullin RB, Arnold KM, Einstein GO (2013) Prospective memory and aging: evidence for preserved spontaneous retrieval with exact but not related cues. Psychol Aging 28(4):910–922
Pink JE, Dodson CS (2013) Negative prospective memory: remembering not to perform an action. Psychon B Rev 20(1):184–190
Rummel J, McDaniel MA (eds) (2019) Prospective memory. Routledge
Scullin MK, Ball BH, Bugg JM (2020) Structural correlates of commission errors in prospective memory. Cortex 124:44–53
Scullin MK, Bugg JM (2013) Failing to forget: prospective memory commission errors can result from spontaneous retrieval and impaired executive control. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 39(3):965
Scullin MK, Bugg JM, McDaniel MA (2012) Whoops, I did it again: commission errors in prospective memory. Psychol Aging 27(1):46
Scullin MK, Einstein GO, McDaniel MA (2009) Evidence for spontaneous retrieval of suspended but not finished prospective memories. Mem Cogn 37(4):425–433
Scullin MK, McDaniel MA, Shelton JT, Lee JH (2010) Focal/nonfocal cue effects in prospective memory: monitoring difficulty or different retrieval processes? J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 36(3):736–749
Schaper P, Grundgeiger T (2017) Commission errors in delay–execute prospective memory tasks. Q J Exp Psychol 70(8):1423–1438
Smith RE (2003) The cost of remembering to remember in event-based prospective memory: investigating the capacity demands of delayed intention performance. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 29(3):347
Vicentin S, Cona G, Marino M, Bisiacchi P, Mantini D et al. (2025) Prestimulus functional connectivity reflects attention orientation in a prospective memory task: a magnetoencephalographic (MEG) study. PLoS ONE 20(2):e0319213
Walser M, Fischer R, Goschke T (2012) The failure of deactivating intentions: aftereffects of completed intentions in the repeated prospective memory cue paradigm. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 38(4):1030
Walser M, Goschke T, Fischer R (2014) The difficulty of letting go: moderators of the deactivation of completed intentions. Psychol Res 78(4):574–583
Walser M, Goschke T, Möschl M, Fischer R (2017) Intention deactivation: effects of prospective memory task similarity on aftereffects of completed intentions. Psychol Res 81(5):961–981
West R (2008) The cognitive neuroscience of prospective memory. In: Kliegel M, McDaniel MA, Einstein GO (eds) Prospective memory: cognitive, neuroscience, developmental, and applied perspectives. Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp 261–282
West R (2011) The temporal dynamics of prospective memory: a review of the ERP and prospective memory literature. Neuropsychologia 49(8):2233–2245
West R, Herndon RW, Crewdson SJ (2001) Neural activity associated with the realization of a delayed intention. Cogn Brain Res 12(1):1–9
West R, Krompinger J (2005) Neural correlates of prospective and retrospective memory. Neuropsychologia 43(3):418–433
West R, Ross-Munroe K (2002) Neural correlates of the formation and realization of delayed intentions. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 2(2):162–173
West R, Wymbs N (2004) Is detecting prospective cues the same as selecting targets? An ERP study. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4(3):354–363
Wilson J, Cutmore TR, Wang Y, Chan RC, Shum DH (2013) Effects of cue frequency and repetition on prospective memory: an ERP investigation. Int J Psychophysiol 90(2):250–257
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Postdoctoral Fellowship Program of CPSF (CZC20252029), the Science and Technology Research Project of Henan Province (252102321092), and the Philosophy and Social Sciences Project of Henan Province (2025CJY046).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
EW and JG contributed to the study conception, design, material preparation and data collection. Data analysis was performed by YG and JG. The first draft of the manuscript was written by JG and YG. MW and YC revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethical approval
The study was conducted in accordance with all ethical recommendations in line with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical Approval was granted by the Institutional Review Board of Henan Provincial Key Laboratory of Psychology and Behavior on March 24, 2025 (Approval number 20250324001).
Informed consent
This article obtained prior consent from all human participants in the pre-test and formal survey. Study participants expressed voluntary and conscious agreement to participate in the study by signing a written informed consent form between April 10 and April 22, 2025, in written form by marking the statement that the consent included participation in the study and publication of the results.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Gan, J., Wang, M., Chen, Y. et al. Neural dynamics of prospective memory aftereffects: a comparative ERP study on focal and non-focal cue processing. Humanit Soc Sci Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07063-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-07063-9
