Search

When ordering tasks, people tend to first perform the task that can be started or completed sooner (precrastination) even if it requires more physical effort. Evidence from transport tasks suggests that precrastination can reduce cognitive effort and will likely not occur if it increases cognitive effort. However, some individuals precrastinate even when it increases cognitive effort. We examined whether individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) influence this suboptimal choice. Participants retrieved two cups of water along a corridor, in the order of their choosing. We measured the frequency of choosing the close cup first (precrastination) while varying water levels in each cup (attention demand) located at different distances. Results showed that the tendency to select the far cup first (avoid precrastination) increases when the close cup is full (high attention demand) vs. not full (low attention demand). Post-hoc results showed high (vs. low) WMC individuals more frequently bypass decisions with relatively higher costs of cognitive effort, avoiding precrastination when the attentional demand of carrying the close (vs. far) cup is relatively high (close-cup full and far-cup half full), but not when it is relatively low (far-cup full). However, there was no evidence that WMC could explain why some individuals always precrastinated, at costs of cognitive effort. Instead, individuals who always precrastinated reported automatic behavior, and those who avoided precrastinating reported decisions of efficiency. Learning, the relationship between precrastination and tendencies to enjoy/engage in thinking or procrastinate, and evidence that precrastination required more cognitive effort in our task, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Memory impairment can necessitate use of external memory aids to preserve functional independence. As external aids can be difficult to learn and remember to use, technology may improve the efficacy of current rehabilitation strategies. We detail the iterative development of a digital application of a paper-and-pencil memory notebook. Methods: Twenty participants (aged 54+) of varying levels of cognitive ability were recruited for four iterations of usability testing (five participants per iteration). Each participant completed a series of tasks using the digital memory notebook (DMN), followed by questionnaires that assessed satisfaction (Questionnaire for User Interface Satisfaction) and usability ratings (Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire) for the application. Results and Conclusions: Between Iterations 2 and 5, participants demonstrated marked reductions in time to complete several types of tasks (e.g., add event, navigate interface) using the DMN. Participants in Iteration 5 also rated all subscales of both the usability and satisfaction questionnaires very highly. Faster task completion times were correlated with more favourable system ratings. However, neither task performance times nor system ratings were correlated with cognitive abilities, scheduling tool use or comfort with technology. Both the questionnaire and performance-based data indicate the final iteration of the DMN was easy to use. Furthermore, the application was user-friendly despite individual differences in cognitive ability, familiarity with scheduling tools and comfort with technology. Future work will demonstrate whether the DMN will support everyday retrospective and prospective memory lapses and increase the functional independence and quality of life for persons with cognitive impairment. Building on practice standards and user-centred design, the digital memory notebook (DMN) application is an "all-in-one" memory aid and organizational tool with an intuitive interface designed to help improve everyday functioning. The DMN's today page, to do list and calendar functions can support everyday prospective and retrospective memory abilities. The DMN's notes, journaling and motivational functions can support longer-term goal planning and mood management. The DMN's alarm functions can support learning to use the DMN and serve as reminders to support prospective memory and aid in activity completion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Smart environments offer valuable technologies for activity monitoring and health assessment. Here, we describe an integration of robots into smart environments to provide more interactive support of individuals with functional limitations. RAS, our Robot Activity Support system, partners smart environment sensing, object detection and mapping, and robot interaction to detect and assist with activity errors that may occur in everyday settings. We describe the components of the RAS system and demonstrate its use in a smart home testbed. To evaluate the usability of RAS, we also collected and analyzed feedback from participants who received assistance from RAS in a smart home setting as they performed routine activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Precrastination, as opposed to procrastination, is the tendency to embark on tasks as soon as possible, even at the expense of extra physical effort. We examined the generality of this recently discovered phenomenon by extending the methods used to study it, mainly to test the hypothesis that precrastination is motivated by cognitive load reduction. Our participants picked up two objects and brought them back together. Participants in Experiment 1 demonstrated precrastination by picking up the near object first, carrying it back to the farther object, and then returning with both. Also, participants given an additional cognitive task (memory load) had a higher probability of precrastinating than those not given the added cognitive task. The objects in Experiment 1 were buckets with balls that had a very low chance of spillage; carrying them required low demands on attention. The near-object-first preference was eliminated in Experiment 2, where the near and far objects were cups with water that had a high chance of spillage; carrying them required higher demands on attention. Had precrastination occurred in this case, it would have greatly increased cognitive effort. The results establish the generality of precrastination and suggest that it is sensitive to cognitive load. Our results complement others showing that people tend to structure their behavior to minimize cognitive effort. The main new discovery is that people expend more physical effort to do so. We discuss the applied implications of our findings, as well as the possibility that precrastination may be a default, automatic behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]