The Effects of Mind-Wandering, Cognitive Load, and Task Engagement on Working Memory Performance in Remote Online Experiments.

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Experimental psychology Pub Date : 2024-01-30 DOI:10.1027/1618-3169/a000599
Kelly Cotton, Joshua Sandry, Timothy J Ricker
{"title":"The Effects of Mind-Wandering, Cognitive Load, and Task Engagement on Working Memory Performance in Remote Online Experiments.","authors":"Kelly Cotton, Joshua Sandry, Timothy J Ricker","doi":"10.1027/1618-3169/a000599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> Recent changes in environments from in-person to remote present several issues for work, education, and research, particularly related to cognitive performance. Increased distraction in remote environments may lead to increases in mind-wandering and disengagement with tasks at hand, whether virtual meetings, online lectures, or psychological experiments. The present study investigated mind-wandering and multitasking effects during working memory tasks in remote and in-person environments. In two experiments, participants completed a working memory task with varied cognitive load during a secondary task. After each working memory trial, participants reported their mind-wandering during that trial. Some participants completed the procedures in-person, while others completed the procedures remotely. Overall, remote participants reported significantly more mind-wandering and poorer secondary task performance than in-person participants, but this pattern was not reflected in working memory accuracy. Both groups exhibited similar multitasking effects on performance. Additional analyses found that for remote participants, task engagement better predicted working memory performance than either cognitive load or mind-wandering rates but did not indicate a tradeoff in resources between tasks. Together, these results demonstrate the importance of considering multiple metrics when assessing performance and illustrate that making assumptions about the equivalence of remote and in-person work is a risky proposition.</p>","PeriodicalId":12173,"journal":{"name":"Experimental psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10915650/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000599","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent changes in environments from in-person to remote present several issues for work, education, and research, particularly related to cognitive performance. Increased distraction in remote environments may lead to increases in mind-wandering and disengagement with tasks at hand, whether virtual meetings, online lectures, or psychological experiments. The present study investigated mind-wandering and multitasking effects during working memory tasks in remote and in-person environments. In two experiments, participants completed a working memory task with varied cognitive load during a secondary task. After each working memory trial, participants reported their mind-wandering during that trial. Some participants completed the procedures in-person, while others completed the procedures remotely. Overall, remote participants reported significantly more mind-wandering and poorer secondary task performance than in-person participants, but this pattern was not reflected in working memory accuracy. Both groups exhibited similar multitasking effects on performance. Additional analyses found that for remote participants, task engagement better predicted working memory performance than either cognitive load or mind-wandering rates but did not indicate a tradeoff in resources between tasks. Together, these results demonstrate the importance of considering multiple metrics when assessing performance and illustrate that making assumptions about the equivalence of remote and in-person work is a risky proposition.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在远程在线实验中,思维游离、认知负荷和任务参与对工作记忆表现的影响。
最近,从面对面环境到远程环境的变化给工作、教育和研究带来了一些问题,尤其是与认知能力有关的问题。无论是虚拟会议、在线讲座还是心理实验,远程环境中分心的情况增多可能会导致思维游离和脱离手头任务的情况增加。本研究调查了在远程和面对面环境中执行工作记忆任务时的思维游离和多任务处理效应。在两项实验中,参与者在完成一项工作记忆任务的同时,还要完成一项辅助任务。在每次工作记忆试验后,参与者都会报告他们在该试验中的思维游离情况。一些参与者亲自完成了这些程序,而另一些参与者则是远程完成的。总体而言,远程参与者的思维游离程度明显高于亲临现场的参与者,其次要任务表现也较差,但这种模式并没有反映在工作记忆的准确性上。两组受试者都表现出了类似的多任务处理对成绩的影响。其他分析发现,对于远程参与者来说,任务参与比认知负荷或思维游离率更能预测工作记忆的表现,但并不表明任务之间的资源权衡。这些结果共同证明了在评估绩效时考虑多种指标的重要性,并说明假设远程工作与现场工作等同是有风险的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Experimental psychology
Experimental psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: As its name implies, Experimental Psychology (ISSN 1618-3169) publishes innovative, original, high-quality experimental research in psychology — quickly! It aims to provide a particularly fast outlet for such research, relying heavily on electronic exchange of information which begins with the electronic submission of manuscripts, and continues throughout the entire review and production process. The scope of the journal is defined by the experimental method, and so papers based on experiments from all areas of psychology are published. In addition to research articles, Experimental Psychology includes occasional theoretical and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Correction to Wiradhany et al., 2024. Directed Forgetting and the Production Effect. Production and Preschoolers: Is There a Benefit and Do They Know? The Interaction Between the Production Effect and Serial Position in Recognition and Recall. Are Social Media Notifications Distracting?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1