Content area
Full Text
Published online: 30 September 2020
© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2020
Abstract
Science requires replicable tools to measure its intended constructs. Attention research has developed tools that have been used in mind-wandering research, but mind-wandering measures often rely on response-inhibition, which introduces speed-accuracy trade-offs that may conflate errors for mind-wandering. We sought to replicate three studies that used an improved mind-wandering measure: the Metronome Response Task (MRT). In a large (N=300) multisite sample, the primary MRT finding was replicated, showing that continuous rhythmic response time variability reliably predicted self-reported mind-wandering. Our findings also show previously undetected differences between intentional and unintentional mind-wandering. While previously reported mediators (motivation) and moderators (confidence) did not replicate, additional covariates add predictive value and additional constructs (e.g., boredom, effort) demonstrate convergent validity. The MRT is useful for inducing and measuring mind-wandering and provides an especially replicable tool. The MRT's measurement of attention could support future models of the complete cycle of sustained attention.
Keywords Mind-wandering . Attention . Variability . Behavioural . Continuous performance task . Boredom
Introduction
Paying attention is a constant challenge. Mind-wandering (MW), conceived of here as task-unrelated thoughts, has been linked to numerous deleterious outcomes including negative affect (Killingsworth & Gilbert, 2010), decreased reading comprehension (Franklin, Mooneyham, Baird, & Schooler, 2014), diminished driving ability (Yanko & Spalek, 2014), and lower cognitive test scores (Mrazek et al., 2012), though MW can be beneficial in some contexts, for example for creativity (Mooneyham & Schooler, 2013; Schooler etal., 2014). Efficiently detecting MW during tasks could allow for valuable corrective interventions, reducing the impact of attentional lapses.
Several behavioral tasks have been created to assess sustained attention (see Fortenbaugh, DeGutis, & Esterman, 2017, for an extended treatment), but these often emphasise response-inhibition rather than characterizing MW per se (Seli et al. 2013b). Two primary concerns emerge from such an approach: dichotomous categorization and speed-accuracy trade-offs. Consider the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART; Robertson, Manly, Andrade, Baddeley, & Yiend, 1997) as an example. During the SART, participants are required to respond with a key-press to frequent on-screen non-targets (the numbers 1, 2, 4-9) and withhold responses for infrequent NOGO targets (the number 3). In such a paradigm, if a participant presses the response when the non-target is on-screen, this...