However, what processes supported by left lrPFC might be engaged while participants maintain a delayed intention?
They were chosen so that the delayed intention could not easily be incorporated in the OG task (see Burgess et al. 2003).
Therefore, Burgess et al. (2001) concluded that this region supports the maintenance of the delayed intention in the context of OG task activity rather than target detection or actual realization of the intention (see also Okuda et al. 1998).
It is probably of most use to envisage PM as referring to a set of behaviors (including non-mnestic cognitive processes) that enable one to realize a delayed intention, rather than as a separate memory module (see [ 3, 4]).
Consequently, using external cues to trigger delayed intentions may be beneficial.
Delaying intentions bears the risk of interference from distracting activities during the delay interval.
Prospective memory involves the formation and completion of delayed intentions and is essential for independent living.
Prospective memory has been variously defined as "remembering to do something in the future" [25], "remembering to do something in the future without being reminded" [26], "timely execution of an intended action at some point in the future" [27], "realization of delayed intentions" [10], "memory for activities to be performed in the future" [4], "remembering to remember" [28], and so on.
However, PM blocks additionally require carrying out delayed intentions.
Engagement in the basic tasks constituted the OG condition, whereas the PM condition additionally required carrying out delayed intentions.
Moreover, left lrPFC recruitment for PM compared with OG blocks may reflect processes involved in maintaining and/or implementing delayed intentions in the context of distracting OG activity.
