No description available.

It is widely held among cognitive aging researchers that older adults are at a disadvantage with respect to the division of attention between two or more concurrent tasks. Some researchers have attributed dual-task performance decrements to reduced processing speed with age while others have attributed declines in dual-task performance to the reduced efficiency of task coordination and control processes. Few researchers, however, have considered the possibility that age-related differences in dual-task performance may be related to underlying differences in the learning mechanisms supporting component task performance. Three studies were conducted which differed in the type of single-task training provided to young and old adult participants: Consistently mapped (CM), variably mapped (VM) and attenuated priority (AP) training. Skilled dual-task performance was then assessed as a function of both component task learning and age through a) the examination of initial and end-level skilled dual-task performance, b) transfer of learning to novel task combination and c) retention capability. It was predicted that type of component task training would moderate age-related differences in skilled dual-task performance. The results were confirmatory, however, were not completely consistent with initial predictions.

Yes / Participants generated both autobiographical memories (AMs) that they believed to be true and intentionally fabricated autobiographical memories (IFAMs). Memories were constructed while a concurrent memory load (random 8-digit sequence) was held in mind or while there was no concurrent load. Amount and accuracy of recall of the concurrent memory load was reliably poorer following generation of IFAMs than following generation of AMs. There was no reliable effect of load on memory generation times; however, IFAMs always took longer to construct than AMs. Finally, replicating previous findings, fewer IFAMs had a field perspective than AMs, IFAMs were less vivid than AMs, and IFAMs contained more motion words (indicative of increased cognitive load). Taken together, these findings show a pattern of systematic differences that mark out IFAMs, and they also show that IFAMs can be identified indirectly by lowered performance on concurrent tasks that increase cognitive load.