Clement Colin
email: clement.colin@univ-lorraine.fr

Antoine Martin

Flavie Bonneviot

Eric Brangier

UNRAVELLING FUTURE THINKING: A VALUABLE CONCEPT FOR PROSPECTIVE ERGONOMICS

Keywords: prospective ergonomics, future thinking, mental time travel, futureoriented cognition, needs anticipation

Future thinking (FT) is the cognitive ability that enables humans to mentally imagine and pre-experience future events. Despite a sharp increase in basic research on future thinking in the last decade, we note the lack of transfer to Human Factors and Ergonomics (HF&E), although the field is increasingly concerned by future artefacts and although theory building on future-oriented HF&E has begun (e.g., prospective ergonomics). This article gives an overview of key findings regarding future thinking, namely i) underlying cognitive mechanisms, ii) functions and obstacles, iii) common descriptors of future thinking, iv) recommendations as to the possible improvement of future thinking during user research and, v) methods for the assessment of future thinking abilities. This synthesis can support HF&E practitioners in fine-tuning their future-oriented methods.

1/Introduction

Faced with growing uncertainties regarding the future, public and private organisations are turning to foresight-oriented design practices in order to probe alternative futures and future users' needs. Needfinding [START_REF] Faste | Perceiving Needs[END_REF], design fiction [START_REF] Sterling | Shaping Things[END_REF], future literacies (Miller 2007(Miller , 2018)), speculative design [START_REF] Dunne | Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming[END_REF], and prospective ergonomics [START_REF] Laurig | Prospektive Ergonomie -Utopie Oder Wirklichkeit? Schriftenreihe Arbeitswissenschaft Des AGV Metall Köln[END_REF][START_REF] Robert | What Is Prospective Ergonomics? A Reflection and a Position on the Future of Ergonomics[END_REF] are some of the usercentred frameworks that have been developed in order to do so. Early on, HF&E has been concerned with getting in as early stage as possible in the invention process [START_REF] Bartlett | The Future for Ergonomics[END_REF]. However, research within HF&E was still qualified as 'reactive ' (vs. 'anticipatory') in 1980[START_REF] Greene | Major Conceptual Problems in the Systems Management of Human Factors/Ergonomics Research[END_REF]. In the mid-1980's future-oriented (or 'prospective') ergonomics was formalized [START_REF] Laurig | Prospektive Ergonomie -Utopie Oder Wirklichkeit? Schriftenreihe Arbeitswissenschaft Des AGV Metall Köln[END_REF](Laurig , 1986(Laurig , 1992;;Laurig and Vedder 1998) and has been further theorized in the 2010's (e.g., Robert andBrangier 2009, 2012;[START_REF] Brangier | L'ergonomie prospective : fondements et enjeux[END_REF][START_REF] Barre | Vers de nouveaux outils pour l'anticipation des besoins utilisateurs : apports méthodologiques pour l'ergonomie prospective[END_REF]Robert and Brangier 2019;Nelson 2019;Loup-Escande 2019). Prospective ergonomics has been distinguished from 'corrective' and 'preventive' ergonomics (as identified by de Montmollin 1967; see Table 1 below). It is defined as 'an ergonomic approach which consists in anticipating future needs, usages and behaviours, or to develop future needs in view of creating processes, products or services well adapted to them' [START_REF] Brangier | L'ergonomie prospective : fondements et enjeux[END_REF]. Beyond research labelled by the authors themselves as 'prospective ergonomics', future-oriented theory building (e.g., the concept of probable and desirable future activities discussed by [START_REF] Sagot | Ergonomics in Product Design: Safety Factor[END_REF][START_REF] Daniellou | L'ergonomie Dans La Conduite de Projets de Conception de Systèmes de Travail[END_REF][START_REF] Duarte | Anticiper l'activité par les configurations d'usage : proposition méthodologique pour conduite de projet[END_REF] as well as research on future artefacts (e.g., [START_REF] Schmorrow | The Future of Learning: Implications for Humans, Adaptive Systems, and Instructional Technologies[END_REF]Navarro 2019;[START_REF] Bonnardot | Anticiper Des Interactions Humaines Par Le Design et l'ergonomie : Le Partage d'énergies Renouvelables Entre Voisins[END_REF]) is common within our field. Yet, one question remains unexplored by these researchers: what is the underlying cognitive process enabling humans to imagine the future? Indeed futureoriented research is often based on some form of user research requiring 'future thinking' (hereafter FT) from users or designers [START_REF] Dong | Building Blocks of Human Design Thinking in Animals[END_REF]. New methods supporting FT are rare (two exceptions are the Guided Imaginary Projection by [START_REF] Allinc | The Guided Imaginary Projection, a New Methodology for Prospective Ergonomics[END_REF] Setting the Stage by [START_REF] Pettersson | Setting the Stage for Autonomous Cars: A Pilot Study of Future Autonomous Driving Experiences[END_REF] and clarifications as to the theoretical roots of FT have not been circulated even within the larger design community.

FT is a process that could be integrated into prospective approaches through structured methods. This would enable users and HF&E practitioners to more easily enrich their future representations, anticipate future needs, define future usage contexts, imagine future artefacts and the activities they may generate. Thus, the goal of this review is to summarize basic research on FT in order to contribute to theory building in our field. FT theory can, in turn, support HF&E practitioners interested in developing a common language as well as fine-tuning and adding rationale to current and new futureoriented research methods. There is indeed a necessity for rationale practices whose use should be understood and explainable by designers as highlighted by Carroll (2013, 1-2). In any case, the application of FT insights to practice is still in its infancy. Nevertheless, it seems a relevant and promising concept for discussion and application.

Originally, future thinking was described as a self-centred ability and defined as the 'mental simulation of future events or circumstances that one might be personally involved in' [START_REF] Atance | Episodic Future Thinking[END_REF]cited by Hallford & D'Argembeau, 2020). More recently, researchers have emphasized that FT events take place within a continuum ranging from pure episodic (personal, specific) simulations to pure semantic (general) simulations [START_REF] Szpunar | A Taxonomy of Prospection: Introducing an Organizational Framework for Future-Oriented Cognition[END_REF]. Building on the above, we define FT as 'the ability that allows the mental simulation and/or pre-experience of future events of personal, general and hybrid nature'.

Other terms have been used to name FT, such as 'prospection' [START_REF] Buckner | Self-Projection and the Brain[END_REF][START_REF] Gilbert | Prospection: Experiencing the Future[END_REF][START_REF] Seligman | Navigating into the Future or Driven by the Past[END_REF], 'anticipation' [START_REF] Sutter | L'anticipation. 2nd ed. Psychiatrie Ouverte[END_REF][START_REF] Riegler | The Role of Anticipation in Cognition[END_REF]Zamenopoulos and Alexiou 2007), 'future-oriented cognition' (D'Argembeau, Renaud, and Van der Linden 2011), 'future-oriented mental time travel' (Michaelian, Klein, and Szpunar 2016) etc. In this review 'future thinking' has been chosen for its simplicity and evocative power. 'Future-oriented mental time travel' (FMTT) would be the more convoluted but precise alternative. It is of note that future thinking is indeed part of a higher-order ability that allows for both past-and futureoriented thinking termed 'mental time travel'.

This review is divided into five sections, each relating to topics that can help HF&E practitioners better understand or include FT in user research. They tackle the following research questions (RQ):

(1) RQ1: What research has been done previously on the topic of FT within HF&E? (2) RQ2: What are the neuro-cognitive bases of FT? (3) RQ3: What are the underlying functions of FT? (4) RQ4: What are the obstacles to FT? (5) RQ5: How can HF&E researchers and practitioners describe and measure FT events? (6) RQ6: What are possible recommendations as to the improvement of FT abilities? (7) RQ7: How can researchers and practitioners prime/cue FT in their protocols? (8) RQ8: How to assess FT abilities?

2/ Theoretical framework

2.1/ Previous approach of FT within HF&E

In order to map previous work on future thinking within HF&E, we surveyed 9 journals and proceedings whose titles explicitly referred to 'human factors' or 'ergonomics' in the 'Human Factors and Ergonomics' section of the SCImago database (i.e., Human Factors, Applied Ergonomics, Ergonomics, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, Human Factors and Ergonomics In Manufacturing, Ergonomics in Design, International Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society). Using the Web of Science search engine, we targeted publications whose topic (abstract, title, keywords) contained a reference to 'prospective', 'prospection', 'anticipation', 'future thinking', 'future-oriented cognition' or 'mental time travel'.

The search yielded 221 results. None of the results contained a reference to either 'future thinking', 'future-oriented cognition' or 'mental time travel'. Of the 221 results, 165 publications were excluded since they used the terms 'prospective' or 'anticipation' in meanings unrelated to cognition about the future (e.g., 'prospective users', 'prospective studies'). The remaining 56 publications can be classified into 3 categories: specific anticipation (N=37), prospective memory (N=14), and general anticipation (N=5). The 37 'specific anticipation' publications deal mostly with short-term anticipation of risks, errors, actions, loads (e.g., anticipation as requiring a cognitive effort in aviation, see [START_REF] Suhir | Probabilistic Modelling of the Concept of Anticipation in Aviation[END_REF]. Here, 'anticipation' is seen as an HF&E variable that is measured but not theorized. The 14 'prospective memory' publications deal with a more delimited and stable concept, prospective memory, that can be defined as 'occasions when intent has been formed and stored in working memory for later recall' [START_REF] Saward | Individual Latent Error Detection and Recovery in Naval Aircraft Maintenance: Introducing a Proposal Linking Schema Theory with a Multi-Process Approach to Human Error Research[END_REF]. This second category exemplifies again the shortterm view of future thinking within HF&E, which is symptomatic of corrective ergonomics. Finally, the 5 publications we grouped under the 'general anticipation' label are more diverse and more akin to future thinking as defined in this paper. Two of them briefly mention prospective activities and prospective diagnoses without further theorization but nevertheless consider more complex activities and a less immediate future [START_REF] Rosen | Demonstration-Based Training: A Review of Instructional Features[END_REF][START_REF] Wiggins | Differences in Situation Assessments and Prospective Diagnoses of Simulated Weather Radar Returns amongst Experienced Pilots[END_REF]. The three others (Nelson, Buisine, and Aoussat 2013; Bonnardel and Didier 2020; Loup-Escande and Loup 2020) are affiliated with 'prospective ergonomics' by the researchers themselves and target respectively anticipation of future use, brainstorming techniques and anticipation of future needs. Bonnardel and Didier's study (2020) is concerned with increasing creativity. However, the theoretical roots of the two variants of the brainstorming technique they present are those of creativity, which is already well discussed within human-centred fields and not directly related to FT theories. Loup-Escande and Loup's article (2020) is concerned with the acceptance of new technology but does not tackle future thinking. Nelson, Buisine and Aoussat's work (2013) tackles in part future thinking by reporting 'findings in cognitive psychology regarding biases in the anticipation of possible future events' and acknowledging that 'few studies have focused on how designers construct and use mental models of the future users of a product, as well as models of their needs'. Yet, they are more concerned about the typology of thoughts a designer can have about future users rather than the mechanism behind those thoughts, its extension to users and its integration into method development. An interesting result from their work is the emphasis of 'counterfactual thinking' defined as 'mental representations of alternatives to past events, actions or states' [START_REF] Epstude | The Functional Theory of Counterfactual Thinking[END_REF]cited by Nelson, Buisine, and Aoussat 2013) as one possible mechanism allowing future thinking. They also highlight future thinking's vulnerability to biases such as foresight biases (MacKay and McKiernan 2004;cited by Nelson, Buisine, and Aoussat 2013).

The 56 relevant publications we surveyed do not really contain theories about future thinking as defined previously and are more in line with a classical HF&E approach (centred on the short-term future in relation to well-delimited events, risks, tasks etc. related to operators' activities). Nelson, Buisine, and Aoussat (2013) are the only ones to touch upon future thinking as a key issue within HF&E and prospective ergonomics, but they do not clarify the theoretical roots of future thinking nor how to leverage it during user research. This shortcoming is the basis for the present review. [START_REF] Debus | Temporal Perspectives in Imagination: On the Nature and Value of Imagining the Future[END_REF], the mental-time travel paradigm, that encompasses both future thinking and past thinking (i.e., memory), argues for the idea that humans can be aware and direct their attention to both the past and future (ibid.), and is in rupture with previous ideas that considered them as distinct (Michaelian, Klein, and Szpunar 2016, 1).

2.2/

2.2.2/ How is FT relevant to HF&E researchers and practitioners?

We argue for the importance of FT for HF&E specialists on the following bases:

 Awareness. Access to the FT corpus is difficult without bringing it to awareness explicitly to the HF&E community.  Theoretical consistency and conceptual clarity. For a detailed primer on their importance see Schlagwein et al. (2019, 818-19), whose work brought to our attention the authors cited hereafter. Since the literature on future-oriented cognition used in HF&E is either scattered between different theoretical bodies or limited, there is a risk of 'construct identity fallacy": distinct phenomena termed as identical or the same phenomenon labelled differently (Larsen and Bong 2016, 531). This potentially causes a risk of confusion, misunderstandings and conceptual mess, a waste of scientific time, and difficulties in theory unification and knowledge cumulation (ibid., 532). Clear definitions prevent findings from being incoherent and theories from remaining 'in the purgatory' (Madge [1962, 538] cited by [START_REF] Schlagwein | Consolidated, Systemic Conceptualization, and Definition of the 'Sharing Economy[END_REF]). At last, one potential drawback of a lack of conceptual development is a limited applicability (as shown in the case of agile methods by [START_REF] Conboy | Agility from First Principles: Reconstructing the Concept of Agility in Information Systems Development[END_REF].  Methodological improvement. Since HF&E has shown interest in moving toward more future-oriented topics, it seems necessary to discuss relevant methods and theory to support this endeavour and ground it on the appropriate literature (see also section 7.4). More specifically, we expect two benefits for practitioners: a better collection of future needs, more efficient behavioural interventions.

At the start of human-centred design is the collection of needs which is also one of the most difficult step because users are often unaware of them (Norman 2013, 9). Other hurdles stemming from both the user or the designer when collecting needs have been emphasised (Martin 2021, 76). Future needs are 'mental construct that corresponds to the operationalisation of pragmatic and hedonic basic needs in a future context […] by a user' (Martin 2021, 74).

Considering the difficulty to collect needs and the link between them and a future context, FT theory provides improved methodological and theoretical support for their collection.

According to Moray (1995Moray ( , 1693) ) the mission for the ergonomics of the future was the 'redesign of society to change human behaviour'. On this regard, FT makes behavioural interventions easier. For example, episodic future thinking can improve maladaptive decision making such as health decisions [START_REF] Rösch | Promoting Farsighted Decisions via Episodic Future Thinking: A Meta-Analysis[END_REF].

2.3/ The neuro-cognitive basis of future thinking

It might appear paradoxical, but future thinking (FT) relies on the memory system [START_REF] Addis | Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future: Common and Distinct Neural Substrates during Event Construction and Elaboration[END_REF][START_REF] Buckner | Self-Projection and the Brain[END_REF][START_REF] Irish | The Pivotal Role of Semantic Memory in Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future[END_REF]D'Argembeau 2016b;[START_REF] Hollis-Hansen | Improvements in Episodic Future Thinking Methodology: Establishing a Standardized Episodic Thinking Control[END_REF]Miloyan, McFarlane, and Suddendorf 2019). Indeed, the construction of FT events involves the access to both past episodic (personal, specific) and past semantic (general) pieces of information, which are then recombined to create mental representations of potential and realistic futures into which individuals can project themselves [START_REF] Buckner | Self-Projection and the Brain[END_REF]D'Argembeau 2016b;[START_REF] Schacter | Episodic Future Thinking: Mechanisms and Functions[END_REF].

At the neurological level, imagery studies confirmed the activation of the same brain areas during tasks aimed at remembering past events and tasks aimed at envisioning the future [START_REF] Addis | Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future: Common and Distinct Neural Substrates during Event Construction and Elaboration[END_REF][START_REF] Schacter | Remembering the Past to Imagine the Future: The Prospective Brain[END_REF]Schacter and Addis 2007;[START_REF] Szpunar | Neural Substrates of Envisioning the Future[END_REF][START_REF] Arzy | Subjective Mental Time: The Functional Architecture of Projecting the Self to Past and Future[END_REF][START_REF] Viard | Mental Time Travel into the Past and the Future in Healthy Aged Adults: An FMRI Study[END_REF]. In terms of neural correlates, the so-called 'default mode network' has been identified as crucial for FT (e.g., [START_REF] Buckner | Self-Projection and the Brain[END_REF][START_REF] Benoit | Specifying the Core Network Supporting Episodic Simulation and Episodic Memory by Activation Likelihood Estimation[END_REF]. The default network includes regions such as the ventral medial prefrontal cortex, the posterior cingulate/retrosplenial cortex, the inferior parietal lobule, the lateral temporal cortex, the dorsal medial prefrontal cortex, and the hippocampal formation [START_REF] Buckner | The Brain's Default Network: Anatomy, Function, and Relevance to Disease[END_REF].

2.4/ The functions of future thinking

Future thinking (FT) is central to human life by making simulation, prediction, intention and planning possible [START_REF] Szpunar | A Taxonomy of Prospection: Introducing an Organizational Framework for Future-Oriented Cognition[END_REF]. Consequently, it enables humans to act flexibly based on realistic representations of the future, thus improving their chances of achieving short-and long-term goals [START_REF] Suddendorf | The Evolution of Foresight: What Is Mental Time Travel, and Is It Unique to Humans?[END_REF][START_REF] Boyer | Evolutionary Economics of Mental Time Travel?[END_REF]D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012). In Table 2 we summarize the detailed functions of FT that have been proposed.

3/ Obstacles to future thinking

Despite its essential role, future thinking (FT) is not without difficulties. For example, Miloyan, Bulley, & Suddendorf (2015) uncovered rumination and retrieval biases causing anxiety and depression. Similarly to these inherent costs, poor FT abilities are putting people at risk of negative consequences. For instance, children with lower FT abilities can suffer from negative impacts on their academic performance, personal safety, and social relationships (Mahy, Moses, and Kliegel 2014). Paradoxically, even rich FT simulations can likewise have negative impacts by being misattributed as an authentic event [START_REF] Devitt | Bidirectional Interactions between Memory and Imagination[END_REF]. Altogether, mental time travel is very problematic for human beings (Tetlock and Gardner 2016, 83). Users have to circumvent many obstacles to represent themselves artefacts that they do not know or that do not exist yet [START_REF] Petiot | Measuring Consumer Perceptions for a Better Comprehension, Specification and Assessment of Product Semantics[END_REF][START_REF] Anastassova | Prototype Evaluation and User-Needs Analysis in the Early Design of Emerging Technologies[END_REF][START_REF] Anastassova | Elicitation of User Requirements for Mobile Interaction with Visual and RFID Tags: A Prototype-Based Exploratory Study[END_REF]Loup-Escande et al. 2014;[START_REF] Bourgeois-Bougrine | Promoting Creative Imagination of Non-Expressed Needs: Exploring a Combined Approach to Enhance Design Thinking[END_REF][START_REF] Barré | Persona Logical Thinking: Improving Requirements Elicitation for Multidisciplinary Teams[END_REF], to imagine the future [START_REF] Trope | Temporal Construal[END_REF]Liberman 2003, 2010;[START_REF] Barré | Persona Logical Thinking: Improving Requirements Elicitation for Multidisciplinary Teams[END_REF] Aoussat 2018; Bourgeois-Bougrine, Latorre, and Mourey 2018) and to imagine new needs [START_REF] Sperandio | Critères Ergonomiques de l'assistance Technologiques Aux Opérateurs[END_REF]; cited by [START_REF] Anastassova | L'analyse ergonomique des besoins en amont de la conception de technologies émergente: le cas de la Réalité Augmentée pour la formation à la maintenance automobile[END_REF].

We highlight and detail below three contributing factors to good or poor FT abilities: temporal distance, memory systems disabilities, and cognitive biases. These factors are the most relevant for researchers and practitioners since they can be mitigated during user recruitment or controlled for by the research protocol.

3.1/ Temporal distance

The more temporally distant from the present the events and actions are, the less concrete, detailed and embodied the representations related to the event or action will be. This leads to biased judgments and predictions [START_REF] Trope | Temporal Construal[END_REF]Liberman 2003, 2010; D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2004; D'Argembeau, Renaud, and Van der Linden 2011).

3.2/ Memory systems

Another obstacle to FT is the limitation of our memory systems. Populations with biological impairments to their memory systems might have difficulties with FT. They fall into three broad categories: children (Michaelian, Klein, and Szpunar 2016), elderly (ibid.), and people with accidental (such as patient KC; [START_REF] Tulving | Memory and Consciousness[END_REF] or illness-induced memory impairments (e.g., [START_REF] Gamboz | Episodic Future Thinking in Amnesic Mild Cognitive Impairment[END_REF][START_REF] Brown | Overgeneralized Autobiographical Memory and Future Thinking in Combat Veterans with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder[END_REF]. In addition to biological impairments, our interactions with digital artefacts, in which we externalise more and more of our memories, have diminished our anticipation abilities (Eustache 2018a, 130). Conversely, a higher number of memories relevant to a topic (e.g., a decade of experience with smartphones) leads to a higher quality of future thoughts related to the topic (Frederiks et al. 2019a). Remarkably, age-related differences in FT abilities are not explained only by impaired retrieval; other hypotheses have been proposed, such as changes in narrative style, in abilities to recombine episodic details, and in the inhibition of task-irrelevant thoughts [START_REF] Gaesser | Characterizing Age-Related Changes in Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future[END_REF].

3.3/ Cognitive biases

Cognitive biases might also hinder the efficiency of our future thinking abilities. Nelson, Buisine, and Aoussat (2013) listed 3 examples of foresight biases: psychological inertia, hindsight bias, and unrealistic optimism. We describe them, and others, in Table 3 below. Table 3: Seven cognitive bias that can have an effect on future thinking

Names

Descriptions References

Psychological inertia

Focus on what is known, familiar or evident which block the thinking process. [START_REF] Savransky | Engineering of Creativity: Introduction to TRIZ Methodology of Inventive Problem Solving[END_REF] Hindsight bias

Effect of the occurrence of a past event on the estimation of the likelihood of such event in the future.

Overestimation of the likelihood of having predicted the occurrence of an event after it has happened. [START_REF] Fischhoff | Hindsight ≠ Foresight: The Effect of Outcome Knowledge on Judgment under Uncertainty[END_REF][START_REF] Arkes | Eliminating the Hindsight Bias[END_REF] Unrealistic optimism

Overestimation of the likelihood of positive outcomes. [START_REF] Weinstein | Unrealistic Optimism about Future Life Events[END_REF])

Shifting baseline syndrome

The use of a subjective reference point as basis for the evaluation of changes (e.g., beginning of career, youth) instead of an objective one, thus skewing the evaluation of changes.

( Most of the FT and future-oriented ergonomics literature is concerned with the general projection of the mind into the future, not with the accurate prediction of the future. As such, we do not expect biases to be as problematic in HF&E as in decision science. To the best of our knowledge, FT researchers do not currently integrate the study of biases within their work. Nevertheless, it is crucial to highlight debiasing [START_REF] Kahneman | Intuitive Prediction: Biases and Corrective Procedures[END_REF]Fischhoff 1981) as an avenue for bias mitigation. The most intuitive debiasing method is to make the subject aware of the bias. This has been proven fruitless in the case of the hindsight bias (Arkes et al. 1988, 305) and overconfidence effect (Kahneman and Tversky 1977, 4-7). Fischhoff proposed three sources of bias that can be targeted by debiasing strategies (Fischhoff 1981, 4): faulty tasks (unfair and misunderstood tasks), faulty judges (perfectible individuals, incorrigible individuals), mismatch between judges and task (restructuring education). Currently, debiasing attempts are plagued by uncertainty regarding their long-term effect and their limitation to laboratory settings [START_REF] Aczel | Is It Time for Studying Real-Life Debiasing? Evaluation of the Effectiveness of an Analogical Intervention Technique[END_REF]. For additional and more recent reviews of debiasing strategies see [START_REF] Larrick | Debiasing[END_REF] and [START_REF] Soll | A User's Guide to Debiasing[END_REF].

3.4/ Cognitive abilities and personality traits

Cognitive abilities could also play a role in FT. Individuals with higher visual imagery abilities (measured with the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire from Marks 1973) can imagine events with greater sensory details than individuals using emotion suppression strategies (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2006). Divergent thinking is also an important skill that influences the vividness of future events. According to [START_REF] Addis | Divergent Thinking and Constructing Episodic Simulations[END_REF], divergent thinking helps generate novel scenarios through the creative combination of disparate memories. D'Argembeau & Van der Linden's research (2006) identified that people who engage in mental imagery in day-to-day life are more likely to generate detailed mental representations of the personal future and past. As mentioned previously, FT abilities seem to be impaired by depression. Recently, [START_REF] Jeunehomme | Prevalence and Determinants of Direct and Generative Modes of Production of Episodic Future Thoughts in the Word Cueing Paradigm[END_REF] uncovered that future events envisioned by depressed individuals are less specific and less rich in episodic details. [START_REF] Brosch | Not My Future? Core Values and the Neural Representation of Future Events[END_REF] conducted a study in which they measured participants' neural activation during projection tasks in the near and distant future. Participants with high self-improvement values (focused on maximizing self-interest) had higher activation when projecting into the near future. Participants with high selftranscendence values (focused on considering others' needs) had higher activation when projecting into the distant future. The authors explain that individuals with strong selfimprovement values would suffer from 'myopia for the future' because they focus on immediate consequences of their action when making a decision. In contrast, individuals with strong self-transcendence values are equally concerned about personal consequences as they are about the consequences for others and, therefore, for future generations.

4/ How to describe and assess future thinking events?

When performing user research, HF&E practitioners need to be able to classify a user's thought as future thinking (FT) or as some other kind of mental event. [START_REF] Debus | Temporal Perspectives in Imagination: On the Nature and Value of Imagining the Future[END_REF] proposes two distinctive features of FT events: 'subjective location in the future' and 'openness'. The former means that the subject identifies the event as happening in the future (in opposition to past or indistinct events). The latter means that the subjects are aware that they (or others) might act in ways that could cause or thwart the event.

Beyond those two conditions, practitioners might want to characterize an FT event more precisely (e.g., compare users, evaluate the efficiency of a method). Thus, it is essential to know descriptors (or dimensions) of FT events. Nine subjective dimensions of FT events have been identified and summarized in Table 4. Valence and intensity can be self-rated (D'Argembeau and [START_REF] D'argembeau | Phenomenal Characteristics Associated with Projecting Oneself Back into the Past and Forward into the Future: Influence of Valence and Temporal Distance[END_REF]. Emotions can also be rated regarding their anticipated (the prediction of the emotional intensity) or anticipatory (how strongly thinking about the future event evokes the emotion) nature (e.g., for pleasure see Hallford et al. 2020).

Perceived control

Perceived influence of the subject over an FT event.

Alternatively, it describes how easy to do the event/activity appears to be. It is sometimes referred to as controllability.

'Influence' sense [START_REF] Jing | Worrying about the Future: An Episodic Specificity Induction Impacts Problem Solving, Reappraisal, and Well-Being[END_REF][START_REF] Boland | A Brighter Future: The Effect of Positive Episodic Simulation on Future Predictions in Non-Depressed, Moderately Dysphoric & Highly Dysphoric Individuals[END_REF]; 'perceived easiness' sense (Hallford et al. 2020).

Perceived control can be self-rated (ibid.)

Personal importance

Relevance of the event to the subject's life (goals, interests, life story, identity etc.).

Liberman [START_REF] Williams | Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy Reduces Overgeneral Autobiographical[END_REF] events can also be 'extended' (i.e., have a defined timeperiod that lasts longer than a day) or 'categoric' (i.e., summarize a number or category of events).

Temporal distance

How far from the present is an FT event.

Liberman We highlight the fact that:

(1) These dimensions are properties that shape the experience and impact FT events (e.g., see D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012). For example, FT events that are highly vivid, plausible and positive are more likely to be remembered and thus beneficial for future behaviours [START_REF] Devitt | Bidirectional Interactions between Memory and Imagination[END_REF]), e.g., by informing decisions or needs.

(2) Some dimensions can be separated into subdimensions. For example, plausibility depends on feasibility (the ease or difficulty of reaching the end state, see Liberman and Trope 1998).

(3) The dimensions mentioned above contribute to the 'pre-experience' (i.e., the degree to which the subject experiences sensory feelings related to the future) and 'autonoetic consciousness' (i.e., the sense of being brought forward in time) meta-dimensions. For example, the feeling of pre-experience is increased by a field perspective (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012), temporal distance and emotional valence (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2004). Furthermore, [START_REF] Hassabis | Patients with Hippocampal Amnesia Cannot Imagine New Experiences[END_REF] suggest that pre-experience can be measured as a composite score of other descriptors (such as vividness). It can be self-rated by the participant (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012). ( 4) Other descriptors exist but since they are less common we did not include them in the table, e.g., ease of imagination, previous thinking about the event, the experience of a similar event in the past, the fact that the event has already been planned (D'Argembeau and Jimenez 2020, 10). ( 5) Some descriptors can be applied to the whole FT event or to its components (e.g., personal significance can be applied to the components comprising future simulations as in McLelland et al. 2015). ( 6) These and additional descriptors can also be used to assess the memories on which the FT event is built upon such as familiarity (how well a past event is known, see [START_REF] Anderson | Imagining Novel Futures: The Roles of Event Plausibility and Familiarity[END_REF]McLelland et al. 2015; and regarding its impact on vividness see D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012). ( 7) Researchers can also use more 'objective' indicators to assess FT events' output such as those used for creativity tasks (fluency, novelty, feasibility and relevance, see Frederiks et al. 2019a), those aimed at measuring accuracy of probabilistic predictions (such as the Brier score, see [START_REF] Ungar | The Good Judgment Project: A Large Scale Test of Different Methods of Combining Expert Predictions[END_REF] or those aimed at measuring the time needed to elicit an FT event (e.g., see D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2004). Developing a standardized evaluation scale of FT based on these indicators and those listed in Table 4 is much needed.

5/ How to support future thinking?

In section 3, we emphasized the factors that make future thinking (FT) difficult for many. What can be done by the HF&E researcher to offset this difficulty? How, practically, can the researcher elicit 'good' future thinking? This section proposes both possible general recommendations (section 5.1) and specific tasks (section 5.2) related to FT priming and elicitation. The recommendations target different variations of FT; thus, the researcher should tailor its approach depending on its goals, e.g., eliciting rather episodic (personal, specific) or rather semantic future thinking (general); aiming at surface-level or in-depth elicitations. Some research has started to incorporate these recommendations as a primer to improve the subsequent use of FT (e.g., Colin and Martin 2019;Frederiks et al. 2019a).

5.1/ General recommendations

5.1.1/ Support the retrieval of past experiences

The creation of mental representations of realistic futures is made possible by the recombination of past episodic and semantic information [START_REF] Addis | Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future: Common and Distinct Neural Substrates during Event Construction and Elaboration[END_REF][START_REF] Schacter | Remembering the Past to Imagine the Future: The Prospective Brain[END_REF][START_REF] Irish | The Pivotal Role of Semantic Memory in Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future[END_REF]D'Argembeau 2016b;[START_REF] Hollis-Hansen | Improvements in Episodic Future Thinking Methodology: Establishing a Standardized Episodic Thinking Control[END_REF]Miloyan, McFarlane, and Suddendorf 2019). Extraction of memories is among the early stages of FT followed by the recombination of details into novel and coherent events [START_REF] Ernst | The Impact of Multiple Sclerosis on Future-Oriented Mental Time Travel: Neuropsychological and Neuroimagining Approaches[END_REF]. To help participants to future-oriented studies, HF&E specialists could emphasize in their methods the retrieval of past experiences related to the studied topic (e.g., problems with smartphones, good experience during carpooling) or give instructions and cues that favour the retrieval of general and specific memories (e.g., [START_REF] Singer | An Experimental Investigation of Specificity and Generality in Memory Narratives[END_REF][START_REF] Williams | The Specificity of Autobiographical Memory and Imageability of the Future[END_REF]. The more vivid the retrieved details are, the more they will offset temporal distance and allow imagining vivid events in return (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012). In patients with multiple sclerosis suffering from cognitive impairments (among which, impairments to their anterograde memory), the use of mental visual imagery improves their autobiographical memory and FT abilities [START_REF] Ernst | Using Mental Visual Imagery to Improve Autobiographical Memory and Episodic Future Thinking in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Patients: A Randomised-Controlled Trial Study[END_REF].

5.1.2/ Start by building upon general details

According to the 'semantic scaffolding hypothesis' [START_REF] Irish | The Pivotal Role of Semantic Memory in Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future[END_REF], semantic (general) knowledge provides a structure that facilitates FT, especially when no related experience exists in the episodic memory. Thus, it is advisable first to construct a general representation of the future event based on memories before asking the subject to build upon this framework and add more episodic details. For example, if HF&E specialists are trying to collect needs regarding the future of automated vehicles (AVs), with which very little users have direct experience, they could start by asking users general questions about their future: in what city will they live, with whom will they live, how will traffic be etc., before moving on to questions about automated vehicles.

5.1.3/ Aim at a detailed representation of the future

The level of detail of the representation is a factor in the projection's quality; it is essential to encourage individuals to imagine their experience in as much detail as possible (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012;Noël et al. 2017). For example, HF&E specialists could use specific temporal-and context-related questions or even use cases, for example: 'In this situation, what would you think if the AV is slowing down?', 'At this precise moment, before making your decision to cross the road, what are you thinking exactly?'.

5.1.4/ Bring the individuals to imagine themselves in the future event

If participants imagine themselves in a future personal context, it allows to preexperience the event in an embodied way, thereby resulting in the emergence of a richer representation that includes sensory (D'Argembeau and Van der Linden 2012; [START_REF] Irish | The Pivotal Role of Semantic Memory in Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future[END_REF][START_REF] Schacter | Remembering the Past to Imagine the Future: The Prospective Brain[END_REF]) and emotional elements. For example, HF&E specialists could ask questions regarding the sensory environment as well as emotional elements such as: 'Which textures and/or colours are on the vehicle's board?' and 'While you look at the AV's interface changing to automated functions, how does it make you feel?'.

5.1.5/ Activate high-order autobiographical and specific knowledge

It is advisable to activate specific and high-order autobiographical knowledge (such as personal goals) since they serve as guides in the simulation of episodic future events by providing frame and structure (D'Argembeau, Raffard, and Van der Linden 2008; D'Argembeau and Mathy 2011; D'Argembeau and Demblon 2012; D'Argembeau 2016a). For example, HF&E specialists could keep in mind specific and personal details about the participant (e.g., dog's name, preferences, etc.). When collecting insights into a future experience with AVs, these personal details could be used to anchor the participant narrative into his own future to avoid general storytelling about someone else's future or about his perception of mainstream ideas regarding the future of AVs. Practitioners should re-centre them by asking: 'You have described what people would do, but how would YOU do if you had an AV?' and 'How Billy, your dog, would react to AVs?'.

5.1.6/ Decrease temporal distance

If compatible with the goal of the study, decreasing temporal distance (see Table 4 for a definition) makes FT events more likely to be experienced at the first-person, more specific, more sensorial and richer in contextual details, (D'Argembeau and [START_REF] D'argembeau | Phenomenal Characteristics Associated with Projecting Oneself Back into the Past and Forward into the Future: Influence of Valence and Temporal Distance[END_REF][START_REF] Anderson | Imagining Novel Futures: The Roles of Event Plausibility and Familiarity[END_REF]. This is in line with construal-level theory (Trope and Liberman 2010) which states that with greater temporal distance, it is more likely that the simulation will be general, poorer in incidental details and based on amodal symbolic representations (abstract, poor in perceptual properties). For example, if HF&E specialists are tasked with improving the efficiency of gambling rehab application, they could onboard users with a task requiring them to imagine changes they could make to their gambling behaviours within the next two weeks and what impacts these changes would have on their lives. Conversely, it will make FT more difficult if they request the user to imagine impacts in 6 months or more.

5.1.7/ Prioritize thinking about positive events

Given that individuals are generally optimistic about the future (Newby-Clark and Ross 2003), it is quicker for them to imagine positive than negative future events, and the events are more detailed and associated with a greater feeling of pre-experience (D'Argembeau and [START_REF] D'argembeau | Phenomenal Characteristics Associated with Projecting Oneself Back into the Past and Forward into the Future: Influence of Valence and Temporal Distance[END_REF]. The representation of negative future events is therefore hindered and requires more time and resources. For example, focusing on AVs again, HF&E specialists could focus (at least in the beginning) on questions tackling positives impacts of AVs before getting into problem-solving about interactions' difficulties or expected incidents.

Existing priming exercises

Beyond these general recommendations that could be included in future-oriented protocols, some existing 'projection tasks' might also be considered. Projection tasks are cognitive tasks designed by psychologists to elicit or test FT functions. They could be used as primers/cues at the beginning of user research protocols or adapted as FTcentred alternatives to existing user research methods (such as semi-structured interviews).

5.2.1/ The Future Thinking Task (FTT)

The FTT (MacLeod et al. 1998) is a verbal fluency task in which participants are asked to imagine as many positive and/or negative experiences that will happen to them at three specific times (next week, next year, next 5 to 10 years). They are then asked to evaluate how they will feel at the time and how likely each experience is. Finally, the participants can also be asked to imagine the experiences deemed the most relevant in as much detail as possible in order to allow them a level of pre-experience (Noël et al. 2017). The Subjective Probability Task [START_REF] Williams | The Specificity of Autobiographical Memory and Imageability of the Future[END_REF] is an alternative and simpler version of the FTT, which involves asking participants to estimate the likelihood that a series of pre-determined negative/positive events will happen to them in the future.

5.2.2/ Future cueing

In the future cueing task, participants are asked to imagine specific episodes that may happen to them in the future. The imagination of these events is cued, that is, it is done in response to some stimuli: short sentences or words that evoke a specific/generic situation or feeling (e.g., 'a situation in which you feel guilty' or 'bouquet'). After the stimulus is presented, the participant is given a limited amount of time (e.g., 60 seconds) to imagine a future event (D'Argembeau et al. 2008;[START_REF] Williams | The Specificity of Autobiographical Memory and Imageability of the Future[END_REF]. The resulting event is influenced by the specificity/generality of the stimuli [START_REF] Williams | The Specificity of Autobiographical Memory and Imageability of the Future[END_REF]. Alternative versions of this technique using pictures, audio or olfactory stimuli can be imagined.

5.2.3/ Adapted Autobiographical Interview

The Adapted Autobiographical Interview [START_REF] Addis | Age-Related Changes in the Episodic Simulation of Future Events[END_REF]Miloyan, McFarlane, and Suddendorf 2019, 380) is a semi-structured interview that probes past and future events by asking participants to generate eight events from randomly generated cue words, in four different time conditions (two past and two future), and under three minutes per event in as many specific details as possible. The transcripts are then used to rate the richness, temporal distance, emotional intensity and personal significance of the events. There is an alternative cueing technique using photographs as stimuli [START_REF] Gaesser | Characterizing Age-Related Changes in Remembering the Past and Imagining the Future[END_REF].

5.2.4/ Experiential Index

The Experiential Index [START_REF] Hassabis | Patients with Hippocampal Amnesia Cannot Imagine New Experiences[END_REF]Miloyan, McFarlane, and Suddendorf 2019, 380) is a semi-structured interview that brings participants to elaborate on short scenarios about the future (e.g., 'Imagine you're lying on a white sandy beach in a beautiful tropical bay') in as many details as possible. The transcripts are then used to rate four variables: content, participant ratings, spatial coherence index, and quality judgments.

6/ Testing future thinking abilities

Recruiting participants with various future thinking (FT) abilities, measuring FT abilities as a control variable, assessing design methods etc., there are numerous reasons to look for ways to assess FT abilities. Yet, few tests exist. Most of them stem from psychopathology research where they are used to compare the FT abilities of individuals with various disabilities. We summarize them in Table 5 below. Some might require adaptations (e.g., shorter duration), nevertheless they will offer helpful references.

7/ Future research directions

We attempted to summarize key findings from future thinking (FT) research and how HF&E practitioners can use it to improve their future-oriented methods. Since it is a new approach within HF&E (and user-centred practice in general), additional work is needed to fully integrate FT in research and applied practices. As such, we highlight four avenues for the development of FT within the HF&E field: i) map FT processes to relevant priming tasks and clarify relations with other cognitive abilities, ii) explore expertise in mental time-travelling and trainability, iii) explore non-verbal dimensions of future thinking, and iv) develop new user research methods.

7.1/ The precise matching of future thinking processes with priming tasks and distinction with other imaginative abilities

First, there is a risk to consider FT as a monolithic ability. In reality, it is underwritten by distinct and successive mechanisms (Michaelian, Klein, and Szpunar 2016), therefore using FT in HF&E research would benefit from a precise mapping of FT mechanisms supplemented with the mention of relevant stimulation/elicitation tasks.

Second, FT is part of a 'galaxy' of other cognitive abilities. For example, it appears to be related to abilities such as mind-wandering, counterfactual thinking and theory of mind (Corballis 2016, 331-33;D'Argembeau 2016b, 204;De Brigard and Gessell 2016, 159-60;Pezzulo 2016, 272;Hallford et al. 2020, 8). Are some of the tasks aimed at stimulating or measuring these abilities usable (or adaptable) to prime FT?

7.2/ Explore expertise and trainability in future thinking

There is little idea as to what an 'ideal time traveller' (an individual with exceptional FT abilities) would look like, but other fields such as political science identified several qualities of very accurate forecasters, called 'superforecasters' [START_REF] Tetlock | Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction[END_REF]. These results lend themselves to hypothesising the existence of a kind of 'prospective expertise'. This so-called 'expertise' begs the question of training FT abilities. Can it be done? Seligman et al.'s (2013) review highlights the possibility of (re)training maladaptive future thinking abilities for psychotherapeutic purposes. In addition, a recent study by Hallford et al. (2020) shows the possibility of improving episodic FT, through substantial training, along several dimensions (i.e., specificity, vividness, plausibility etc.). Being able to train users and HF&E practitioners for FT would add another level to its impact on future-oriented research, most notably when working with people living in poverty whose temporal horizon can be impaired by challenging living conditions (Colombi 2020, 129-32). Speculative fiction author William Gibson once said, 'The future is already hereit's just not very evenly distributed.' [START_REF] Gladstone | The Science in Science Fiction[END_REF]. This is true for both the physical world and the mental world. Equitable access to future thinking is an issue. FT theory and methods could be a way to level the playing field and support the empowerment of disadvantaged communities regarding their future.

7.3/ Explore non-verbal dimensions of future thinking

The nine dimensions we proposed in section 4 to assess FT events could be complemented by non-verbal dimensions (e.g., limb or eye movements). Non-verbal dimensions are an essential cue during face-to-face techniques such as interviews according to Vermersch (2017, 51-52, 98-101). Indeed, the nine dimensions are mostly helpful for assessing the quality and quantity of the FT events after user research is completed. However, non-verbal dimensions could be used during user research and allow for live adjustments. The value of non-verbal dimensions has been noted by [START_REF] Berntsen | Remembering and Forecasting: The Relation between Autobiographical Memory and Episodic Future Thinking[END_REF] who proposed physical/bodily reaction as a worthwhile descriptor for FT events. Some existing research provides support to this by linking eye movements (de [START_REF] Vito | Eye Movements Disrupt Episodic Future Thinking[END_REF][START_REF] El Haj | Eying the Future: Eye Movement in Past and Future Thinking[END_REF] or activation of pupil dilation (El Haj and Moustafa 2020) with FT events. Miller (2018, 6) highlighted the lack of reflection, within the broader field of future studies, to the following question: 'What methods do we use to 'know the future'?'. As an example of method development using FT theory, the 'needs anticipation interview', is one of the possible answers to Miller's question. Within prospective ergonomics an interview technique is indeed under development to take into account FT [START_REF] Brangier | An Interview Process to Anticipate Future Needs[END_REF](Brangier et al. , 2019;;Martin, Agnoletti, and Brangier 2021a;Martin 2021), i.e., it starts with general details (coherent with 5.1.2), activates personal goals related (consistent with 5.1.5) and brings individuals to imagine their own future activities (coherent with 5.1.4). There is room for further improvements though and more could be done regarding methods such as personas (could 'prospective' personas be written in a way that would improve HF&E practitioners' future thinking?, e.g., see Martin, Agnoletti, and Brangier [2021b]) or focus groups (could a group setting improve FT compared to an individual setting?).

7.4/ Develop user research methods supported by future thinking theory

8/ Conclusion

In this review we described future thinking (FT), the ability that allows for the mental simulation and/or pre-experience of future events of personal, general or hybrid nature. Indeed, despite a stronger emphasis than before on future-oriented studies in the HF&E field, very few researches leverage the understandings developed by neuroscientists and psychologists on that matter. In order to support HF&E researchers in doing so, the present synthesis highlighted the connections between memory systems and FT, the functions of FT in humans, the obstacles to FT, the descriptors of FT events, general recommendations and cueing/priming tasks, and possible assessment methods of FT functions (see Table 6 for a summary).

Table 6: Summary of research questions and findings

Research questions

Summary of findings RQ1: What has been done previously on the topic of FT within HF&E? (see section 2.1) Future-orientation is a rare topic within HF&E and has mostly been addressed using concepts such as 'prospective memory' and 'anticipation' that are distinct from FT and less useful for future-oriented or 'prospective' user research.

RQ2: What are the neuro-cognitive bases of FT? (see section 2.3) FT relies on the memory systems and the default mode network.

RQ3: What are the underlying functions of FT? (see section 2.4)

FT abilities make possible or partly support: simulation, prediction, intention and planning possible, achieving goals, affective forecast, goal orientation, preparation for threats, flexible decision-making, deliberate practice, motive priority management, boredom reduction, death preparation, identity contrasting, negative emotion regulation, social bonding, goal setting, planning, problem-solving, decision-making, positive emotion regulation, prospective memory, delay of gratification and saving behaviour.

RQ4: What are the obstacles to FT? (see section 3)

We categorized FT obstacles into three categories: temporal distance, limitations to our memory systems and cognitive biases. RQ5: How can HF&E researchers and practitioners describe and measure FT events? (see section 4)

We identified nine common descriptors of FT events: emotionality, perceived control, personal importance, perspective, plausibility, sensory modality, specificity, temporal distance, vividness.

RQ6: What are possible recommendations as to the improvement elicitation of FT abilities? (see section 5.1)

We summarized seven general recommendations that could guide the creation of user research methods that rely on FT: support the retrieval of past experiences, build a general context of the future event, bring the individuals to imagine themselves in the future event, build a detailed representation about the future, activate personal goals, decrease temporal distance, target positive events first.

RQ7: How can researchers and practitioners prime/cue this ability in their protocols? (see section 5.2)

We identified four cueing/priming tasks of FT, namely: the Future Thinking Task, future cueing, the Adapted Autobiographical Interview and the Experiential Index.

RQ8: How to assess FT abilities? (see section 6)

We identified seven questionnaires, tasks and scales that currently provide means to assess FT abilities: the Memory and Temporal Experience Questionnaire, the Future Thinking Task, the Adapted Autobiographical Interview, the Experiential Index, the Functions of Future Thinking Scale, the Children's Future Thinking Questionnaire and the Priming Manipulation Checks Scale.

Table 1 : Modes of ergonomic interventions (adapted from Brangier and Robert 2014).

 1

	Intervention modality
	Characteristics	Prospective	Preventive	Corrective
	Actions and goals	Anticipate future needs and activities and imagine ideas of corresponding artefacts	Improve the design or development of a proven artefact	Adjust an artefact to the problems encountered by its users
	Dynamics	Proactive	Proactive/ Reactive	Reactive
	Temporality of reference	Future	Present	Past

Relevance of future thinking for HF&E

	2.2.1/ How is FT different from other cognitive processes?
	HF&E researchers and practitioners are familiar with many cognitive processes:
	prospective memory, prospective cognition, creative thinking, counterfactual thinking
	etc. What makes FT theory different is:
	 Specificity. It encompasses and attempts to explain all future-oriented thought
	processes (e.g., prospective memory see Michaelian, Klein, and Szpunar 2016,
	27; Eustache 2018b, 9) and only future-oriented thought processes. This
	specificity is also supported by distinctive neural correlates (see 2.3).
	 Theoretical distinctiveness. FT theory explains phenomena that were not
	explained by other theories (namely, how thoughts of the future are created and
	directed). Other theories on cognitive processes, such as theories on creative
	thinking do not explain future thinking. FT is indeed part of what has been
	described as a new paradigm

Table 2 : Functions of future thinking Functions of future thinking References

 2

	Boredom reduction, death preparation,
	identity contrasting, negative emotion
	regulation, social bonding, goal setting,	Hallford & D'Argembeau (2020)
	planning, problem-solving, decision-
	making, positive emotion regulation
	Planning, prospective memory, episodic
	foresight prospective memory, delay of
	gratification (related to the function of motive priority management according to	Mazachowsky & Mahy (2020)
	Bischof-Kohler & Bischof, 2007), saving
	behaviour

Self-control, construction of a sense of identity D'Argembeau & Demblon (2012) Simulation, prediction, intention and planning Szpunar, Spreng, & Schacter (2014) Affective forecast, goal orientation, preparation for threats, flexible decisionmaking, deliberate practice Bulley, Redshaw, & Suddendorf (2020)

Table 4 : List of nine subjective descriptors of future thinking events with corresponding recommendations and measurements (ordered alphabetically).

 4

	Descriptors	Definitions	References	Recommendations and measurements
			D'Argembeau & Van
	Emotionality	Emotional nature, valence and intensity of an FT event.	der Linden (2004); Berntsen & Bohn (2010); Szpunar, Addis, & Schacter
			(2012)

Table 5 : Seven scales or tests of future thinking abilities Name of the test Description Reference

 5

	Memory and Temporal Experience Questionnaire	This questionnaire assesses the plausibility of general (10 items) and specific (7 items) FT events.	Klein, Loftus, & Kihlstrom (2002)
	Future Thinking Task	In addition to cueing FT, these tasks can also be	See 5.2.1
	Adapted Autobiographical Interview	used to rate FT abilities and compare participants.	See 5.2.3

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful feedback regarding topics to clarify (biases and relevancy of FT) and improvements to the structure of the article.

Funding

This work has been partly supported by a CIFRE funding granted to Total S.E. by ANRT on behalf of the French Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation. This work has been partly supported by the French PIA project « Lorraine Université d'Excellence », reference ANR-15-IDEX-04-LUE. This work has been partly supported by the Vedecom Institute. Prinzipien,[195][196][197][198][199][200]. REFA-Verband Für Arbeitsstudien Und Betriebsorganisation. Beuth Verlag GmbH. Laurig, Wolfgang, and Joachim Vedder. 1998. "Overview." In , edited by Jeanne Mager Stellman, 4th edition, 1:29.2. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Organization. http://www.ilocis.org/documents/chpt29e.htm. Liberman, Nira, and Yaacov Trope. 1998. "The Role of Feasibility and Desirability Considerations in near and Distant Future Decisions: A Test of Temporal Construal Theory." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75 (1): 5-18. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.5. Loup-Escande, Emilie, Jean-Marie Burkhardt, Olivier Christmann, and Simon Richir. 2014. "Needs' Elaboration between Users, Designers and Project Leaders: Analysis of a Design Process of a Virtual Reality-Based Software." Information and Software Technology 56 (8): 1049-61. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2014.04.008. Loup-Escande, Emilie. 2019. "Concevoir Des Technologies Émergentes Acceptables : Complémentarité Des Approches Expérimentale, Écologique et Prospective." Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Amiens, France: Université de Picardie Jules Verne. Loup-Escande, Emilie, and Guillaume Loup. 2020. "Designing Acceptable Emerging Technologies: What Contribution from Ergonomics?" Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 1-22. doi:10.1080/1463922X.2020.1836568. MacKay, R. Bradley, and Peter McKiernan. 2004. "The Role of Hindsight in Foresight: Refining Strategic Reasoning." Futures, Coping with the Future: Developing Organizational Foresightfulness, 36 (2): 161-79. doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00147-2. MacLeod, Andrew K. 1996. "Affect, Emotional Disorder, and Future-Directed Thinking." Cognition & Emotion 10 (1): 69-86. doi:10.1080/026999396380394. MacLeod, Andrew K., Philip Tata, Kathryn Evans, Peter Tyrer, Ulrike Schmidt, Kate Davidson, Susan Thornton, and Jose Catalan. 1998. "Recovery of Positive Future Thinking within a High-Risk Parasuicide Group: Results from a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial." British Journal of Clinical Psychology 37 (4): 371-79. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8260.1998.tb01394.x. Madge, John Hylton. 1962. The Origins of Scientific Sociology. New York, USA: The Free Press. Mahy, Caitlin E.V., Louis J. Moses, and Matthias Kliegel. 2014. "The Development of Prospective Memory in Children: An Executive Framework." Developmental Review 34 (4): 305-26. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2014.08.001. Marks, David F. 1973. "Visual Imagery Differences in the Recall of Pictures." British Journal of Psychology 64 (1): 17-24. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1973.tb01322.x. Martin, Antoine. 2021. "Méthodes d'ergonomie Prospective Pour l'exploration Des Besoins Futurs." Metz, France: Université de Lorraine. Martin, Antoine, Marie-France Agnoletti, and Eric Brangier. 2021a. "Ordinary Users, Precursory Users and Experts in the Anticipation of Future Needs: Evaluation of Their Contribution in the Elaboration of New Needs in Energy for Housing." Applied Ergonomics 94. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103394. Martin, Antoine, Marie-France Agnoletti, and Éric Brangier. 2021b. "Improve Creativity in Future-Oriented Design with the Prospective Persona." In Proceedings of the 21st Unravelling future thinking: a valuable concept for prospective ergonomics Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2021). IEA 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 726-36. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-74602-5_99. Mazachowsky, Tessa R., and Caitlin E. V. Mahy. 2020. "Constructing the Children's Future Thinking Questionnaire: A Reliable and Valid Measure of Children's Future-Oriented Cognition." Developmental Psychology 56 (4): 756-72. doi:10.1037/dev0000885. McLelland, Victoria C., Aleea L. Devitt, Daniel L. Schacter, and Donna Rose Addis. 2015. "Making the Future Memorable: The Phenomenology of Remembered Future Events." Memory 23 (8): 1255-63. doi:10.1080/09658211.2014.972960. Michaelian, Kourken, Stanley B. Klein, and Karl K. Szpunar. 2016. "The Past, the Present, and the Future of Future-Oriented Mental Time Travel." In Seeing the Future: Theoretical Perspectives on Future-Oriented Mental Time Travel, edited by Kourken Michaelian, Stanley B. Klein, and Karl K. Szpunar, 1-18. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190241537.003.0001. Miller, Riel. 2007. "Futures Literacy: A Hybrid Strategic Scenario Method." Futures 39 (4): 341-62. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2006.12.001. ---, ed. 2018. Transforming the Future. New York, USA: Routledge. Miloyan, Beyon, Adam Bulley, and Thomas Suddendorf. 2015. "Episodic Foresight and Anxiety: Proximate and Ultimate Perspectives." British Journal of Clinical Psychology 55 (1): 4-22. doi:10.1111/bjc.12080. Miloyan, Beyon, Kimberley A. McFarlane, and Thomas Suddendorf. 2019. "Measuring Mental Time Travel: Is the Hippocampus Really Critical for Episodic Memory and Episodic Foresight?" Cortex 117: 371-84. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2019.01.020. Montmollin, Maurice de. 1967. Les Systèmes Hommes-Machines : Introduction à l'ergonomie. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France. Moore, Don A., and Paul J. Healy. 2008. "The Trouble with Overconfidence." Psychological Review 115 (2): 502-17. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.502. Moray, Neville. 1995. "Ergonomics and the Global Problems of the Twenty-First Century." Ergonomics 38. doi:10.1080/00140139508925220. Navarro, Jordan. 2019. "A State of Science on Highly Automated Driving." Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 20 (3): 366-96. doi:10.1080/1463922X.2018.1439544. Nelis, Sabine, Emily A. Holmes, James W. Griffith, and Filip Raes. 2014. "Mental Imagery during Daily Life: Psychometric Evaluation of the Spontaneous Use of Imagery Scale (SUIS)." Psychologica Belgica 54 (1): 19-32. doi:10.5334/pb.ag. Nelson, Julien. 2019. "Ergonomie Prospective, Technologies Émergentes et Créativité." Habilitation à diriger des recherches, Metz, France: Université de Lorraine. Nelson, Julien, Stéphanie Buisine, and Améziane Aoussat. 2013. "Anticipating the Use of Future Things: Towards a Framework for Prospective Use Analysis in Innovation Design Projects." Applied Ergonomics 44 (6): 948-56. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2013.01.002. Newby-Clark, Ian R., and Michael Ross. 2003. "Conceiving the Past and Future." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29 (7): 807-18. doi:10.1177/0146167203029007001. Noël, Xavier, Mélanie Saeremans, Charles Kornreich, Nematollah Jaafari, and Arnaud D'Argembeau. 2017. "Future-Oriented Mental Time Travel in Individuals with Disordered Gambling." Consciousness and Cognition 49: 227-36. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2017.02.006. Norman, Donald A. 2013. The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books.

Contributions