A study of metamemory and memory of Hong Kong elders : measurement, correlates, and intervention outcome of a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Metamemory refers to knowledge of, awareness of, and beliefs about one’s own and human memory functioning. Contrasting with the subjective nature of metamemory, memory is objective performance. Through monitoring and control, metamemory is believed to impact upon memory-related behaviour and affect which in turn influence learning and performance outcome. Despite decades of research work, relationship between metamemory and memory remains unclear. Evidence on local Chinese is scare. In view of knowledge gaps, aging population, and the importance of subjective memory in clinical practice, the present research carried out 3 studies on Hong Kong elders.

In Study 1, four metamemory scales were adapted from the West, including 3 scales derived from the Memory Functioning Questionnaire (MFQ). They were Memory Self-efficacy Questionnaire, Anxiety about Memory Questionnaire, Mnemonic Usage Questionnaire and Stereotypesabout Memory Aging Questionnaire. Study 1 examined the reliability and internal consistency of the Chinese translated scales on 32 elders. Study 2 examined the associationbetween metamemory and memory on 181 elders. In Study 3, a metamemory-based cognitiveintervention was developed for a randomizedcontrolled trial including an Intervention Group (n=35) and a Control Group (n=33). The Chinese metamemory scales demonstrated high degree of internal consistency (α= .78 –.94) and good to excellent reliability (ICC = .67 –.85, all ps < .01). The findings of Study 2 supported all research hypotheses i.e. (I) there was an association between metamemory and memory(rs = .17 -.44, ps < .05; Fs = 7.93 –9.64, all ps = .000, adjusted R2= .21–.23); (II) stereotypes about memory aging was a salient construct related to metamemory (rs = -.4 –.25, all ps <.05) and memory performance of local elders (rs= -.25–-.27, all ps= .01), making unique effect over and above that of MFQ (R2change = .05,F(1, 87) = 6.26, p=.01); and (III) elders were able to adjust their memory performance prediction (ts = 2.97 –2.99, all ps < .01) and improve prediction accuracyover time (ts = 4.62 –5.85, all ps = .000). The findings of Study 3 indicated that after controlling for Pre-Intervention baseline, Intervention Group showed significant reduction in stereotyped beliefs in memory aging [ F(1) = 7.22, p= .01, Partial η2= .10; t = 2.76, p= .01, d= .67 ] , significant increase in mnemonic use [F(1) = 20.99, p= .000, Partial η2= .24; t= -4.58, p= .000, d= 1.10 ], as well as significant improvement in general cognitive functioning [ MoCA;F(1) = 29.72, p= .000, Partial η2= .31; t= -4.81, p= .000, d= 1.15 ], supporting the research hypothesisabout the efficacy of metamemory-based cognitive intervention. In conclusion, the present research suggests clinical applications of structured metamemory questionnaire, inclusion of stereotyped memory beliefsin the evaluation of subjective memory, and implementation of metamemory-based cognitiveintervention for promotion of elderly cognitive health at the primary health care level.