A novel scoring protocol reveals age-related differences in abstract compared to concrete thinking in cued autobiographical remembering

Abstract

Human imagination has garnered growing interest in many fields. However, it remains unclear how to characterize different forms of imaginative thinking and how imagination differs between young and older adults. Here, we introduce a novel scoring protocol based on recent theoretical developments in the cognitive neuroscience of imagination to provide a broad tool with which to characterize imaginative thinking. The scoring protocol distinguishes between concrete/perceptual forms of imagination termed the "mind's eye" and abstract/reflective forms of imagination termed the "mind's mind." The protocol also captures whether thoughts pertain to the self, others, or both. We applied this scoring protocol with high inter-rater reliability across two studies involving distinct participants and narrative-based imagination tasks. When compared to young adults, older adults showed a bias toward general content, which is a feature of the mind's mind form of thinking while describing aloud their memories of specific, past events (Study 1). Further, older adults made fewer references to the self. In a separate study of only older adults (Study 2), increasing age was not associated with a bias toward the mind's mind while describing specific past or future events. These results reveal that imaginative thinking can be characterized within the Mind's Eye Mind's Mind framework, with implications for understanding cognitively normal older age.

Fig. 1

A matrix bubble showing mind’s eye and mind’s mind subtypes. Clusters categorized as mind’s eye (green) and mind’s mind (blue). Self- and other-related elements of thought can be used with mind’s eye or mind’s mind subtypes (blue/green gradient), but not on their own.

Fig. 2

Partial transcript with novel scoring procedure applied. Green labels are mind’s eye elements and blue labels are mind’s mind elements.

Fig. 3

Frequency of the subtypes for Mind’s Eye and Mind’s Mind in Study 1. Boxplots show median represented by a line within each box. Brackets capture data within the upper and lower quartiles.

Fig. 4

Study 1 age group differences for proportion of mind’s mind elements as well as self- and other-related elements. Age group differences for proportion of (A) mind’s eye elements, (B) mind’s mind elements, (C) self-related elements, and (D) other-related elements. Boxplots show median represented by a line within each box. Brackets capture data within the upper and lower quartiles.

Fig. 5

Pearson correlation between proportion of mind’s mind and mind’s eye elements for past and future thinking. The shaded region represents the 95% confidence interval of the regression line.