Skylar J Laursen, Jeffrey D Wammes, Chris M Fiacconi
{"title":"Examining the effect of expected test format and test difficulty on the frequency and mnemonic costs of mind wandering.","authors":"Skylar J Laursen, Jeffrey D Wammes, Chris M Fiacconi","doi":"10.1177/17470218231187892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mind wandering, generally defined as task-unrelated thought, has been shown to constitute between 30% and 50% of individuals' thoughts during almost every activity in which they are engaged. Critically, however, previous research has shown that the demands of a given task can lead to either the up- or down-regulation of mind wandering and that engagement in mind wandering may be differentially detrimental to future memory performance depending on learning conditions. The goal of the current research was to gain a better understanding of how the circumstances surrounding a learning episode affect the frequency with which individuals engage in off-task thought, and the extent to which these differences differentially affect memory performance across different test formats. Specifically, while prior work has manipulated the conditions of encoding, we focused on the anticipated characteristics of the retrieval task, thereby examining whether the anticipation of later demands imposed by the expected test format/difficulty would influence the frequency or performance costs of mind wandering during encoding. Across three experiments, we demonstrate that the anticipation of future test demands, as modelled by expected test format/difficulty, does not affect rates of mind wandering. However, the costs associated with mind wandering do appear to scale with the difficulty of the test. These findings provide important new insights into the impact of off-task thought on future memory performance and constrain our understanding of the strategic regulation of inattention in the context of learning and memory.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1068-1092"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11032633/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231187892","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mind wandering, generally defined as task-unrelated thought, has been shown to constitute between 30% and 50% of individuals' thoughts during almost every activity in which they are engaged. Critically, however, previous research has shown that the demands of a given task can lead to either the up- or down-regulation of mind wandering and that engagement in mind wandering may be differentially detrimental to future memory performance depending on learning conditions. The goal of the current research was to gain a better understanding of how the circumstances surrounding a learning episode affect the frequency with which individuals engage in off-task thought, and the extent to which these differences differentially affect memory performance across different test formats. Specifically, while prior work has manipulated the conditions of encoding, we focused on the anticipated characteristics of the retrieval task, thereby examining whether the anticipation of later demands imposed by the expected test format/difficulty would influence the frequency or performance costs of mind wandering during encoding. Across three experiments, we demonstrate that the anticipation of future test demands, as modelled by expected test format/difficulty, does not affect rates of mind wandering. However, the costs associated with mind wandering do appear to scale with the difficulty of the test. These findings provide important new insights into the impact of off-task thought on future memory performance and constrain our understanding of the strategic regulation of inattention in the context of learning and memory.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.