Motivation, Intentionality, and Mind Wandering: Implications for Assessments of Task-Unrelated Thought

Researchers of mind wandering frequently assume that (a) participants are motivated to do well on the tasks they are given, and (b) task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) that occur during task performance reflect unintentional, unwanted thoughts that occur despite participants' best intentions to main...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition memory, and cognition, 2015-09, Vol.41 (5), p.1417-1425
Hauptverfasser: Seli, Paul, Cheyne, James Allan, Xu, Mengran, Purdon, Christine, Smilek, Daniel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1425
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1417
container_title Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition
container_volume 41
creator Seli, Paul
Cheyne, James Allan
Xu, Mengran
Purdon, Christine
Smilek, Daniel
description Researchers of mind wandering frequently assume that (a) participants are motivated to do well on the tasks they are given, and (b) task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) that occur during task performance reflect unintentional, unwanted thoughts that occur despite participants' best intentions to maintain task-focus. Given the relatively boring and tedious nature of most mind-wandering tasks, however, there is the possibility that some participants have little motivation to do well on such tasks, and that this lack of motivation might in turn result in increases specifically in intentional TUTs. In the present study, we explored these possibilities, finding that individuals reporting lower motivation to perform well on a sustained-attention task reported more intentional relative to unintentional TUTs compared with individuals reporting higher motivation. Interestingly, our results indicate that the extent to which participants engage in intentional versus unintentional TUTs does not differentially relate to performance: both types of off-task thought were found to be equally associated with performance decrements. Participants with low levels of task-motivation also engaged in more overall TUTs, however, and this increase in TUTs was associated with greater performance decrements. We discuss these findings in the context of the literature on mind wandering, highlighting the importance of assessing the intentionality of TUTs and motivation to perform well on tasks assessing mind wandering.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/xlm0000116
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1710983043</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1073898</ericid><sourcerecordid>1660449137</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a468t-c6bac72e917b37f0913589051654cbbe6c98c111395fd440d6fabf82580d9c53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kT1vFDEQhi0EIsdBQw-yRIPQLXjW33RRFOBQIppDlJbXaycb9gvbi7h_jy8XgkSBC3ukeeadGb8IPQfyFgiV7371AykHQDxAK9BUV1Ar_hCtSC1VJammJ-hJSjcHiFD1GJ3UXFJCiVihcDnl7qfN3TRu8HbMfjyEtu_yfoPt2OLLrlzfSuRjN169x9th7jt3W5BwmCI-TcmnNJTChKeAdzZ9r76O0fc2-xbvrqfl6jo_RY-C7ZN_dveu0e7D-e7sU3Xx5eP27PSiskyoXDnRWCdrr0E2VAaigXKlCQfBmWsaL5xWDgCo5qFljLQi2CaomivSasfpGr0-ys5x-rH4lM3QJef73o5-WpIBCUQrShgt6Kt_0JtpiWXzW4prSrgS_6WEIIyVCWWh3hwpF6eUog9mjt1g494AMQeLzF-LCvzyTnJpBt_eo388KcCLI1B-3N2nzz8DkVSV6ddoc8zb2Zo57Z2NuXO9T26JsdhwaGYYGG6AgaS_AQwVo_Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1660449137</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Motivation, Intentionality, and Mind Wandering: Implications for Assessments of Task-Unrelated Thought</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Seli, Paul ; Cheyne, James Allan ; Xu, Mengran ; Purdon, Christine ; Smilek, Daniel</creator><contributor>Greene, Robert L</contributor><creatorcontrib>Seli, Paul ; Cheyne, James Allan ; Xu, Mengran ; Purdon, Christine ; Smilek, Daniel ; Greene, Robert L</creatorcontrib><description>Researchers of mind wandering frequently assume that (a) participants are motivated to do well on the tasks they are given, and (b) task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) that occur during task performance reflect unintentional, unwanted thoughts that occur despite participants' best intentions to maintain task-focus. Given the relatively boring and tedious nature of most mind-wandering tasks, however, there is the possibility that some participants have little motivation to do well on such tasks, and that this lack of motivation might in turn result in increases specifically in intentional TUTs. In the present study, we explored these possibilities, finding that individuals reporting lower motivation to perform well on a sustained-attention task reported more intentional relative to unintentional TUTs compared with individuals reporting higher motivation. Interestingly, our results indicate that the extent to which participants engage in intentional versus unintentional TUTs does not differentially relate to performance: both types of off-task thought were found to be equally associated with performance decrements. Participants with low levels of task-motivation also engaged in more overall TUTs, however, and this increase in TUTs was associated with greater performance decrements. We discuss these findings in the context of the literature on mind wandering, highlighting the importance of assessing the intentionality of TUTs and motivation to perform well on tasks assessing mind wandering.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0278-7393</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1285</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000116</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25730306</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Attention - physiology ; Attention Control ; Canada ; Cognitions ; Cognitive Processes ; Comprehension ; Experimental psychology ; Female ; Foreign Countries ; Human ; Humans ; Imagination ; Intention ; Male ; Mind ; Mind Wandering ; Motivation ; Motivation - physiology ; Multiple Regression Analysis ; Reaction Time - physiology ; Responses ; Statistics as Topic ; Students ; Task Analysis ; Thinking - physiology ; Undergraduate Students ; Universities ; Visual task performance</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2015-09, Vol.41 (5), p.1417-1425</ispartof><rights>2015 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>(c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).</rights><rights>2015, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Sep 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a468t-c6bac72e917b37f0913589051654cbbe6c98c111395fd440d6fabf82580d9c53</citedby><orcidid>0000-0003-0941-6398</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1073898$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25730306$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Greene, Robert L</contributor><creatorcontrib>Seli, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheyne, James Allan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Mengran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Purdon, Christine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smilek, Daniel</creatorcontrib><title>Motivation, Intentionality, and Mind Wandering: Implications for Assessments of Task-Unrelated Thought</title><title>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</title><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><description>Researchers of mind wandering frequently assume that (a) participants are motivated to do well on the tasks they are given, and (b) task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) that occur during task performance reflect unintentional, unwanted thoughts that occur despite participants' best intentions to maintain task-focus. Given the relatively boring and tedious nature of most mind-wandering tasks, however, there is the possibility that some participants have little motivation to do well on such tasks, and that this lack of motivation might in turn result in increases specifically in intentional TUTs. In the present study, we explored these possibilities, finding that individuals reporting lower motivation to perform well on a sustained-attention task reported more intentional relative to unintentional TUTs compared with individuals reporting higher motivation. Interestingly, our results indicate that the extent to which participants engage in intentional versus unintentional TUTs does not differentially relate to performance: both types of off-task thought were found to be equally associated with performance decrements. Participants with low levels of task-motivation also engaged in more overall TUTs, however, and this increase in TUTs was associated with greater performance decrements. We discuss these findings in the context of the literature on mind wandering, highlighting the importance of assessing the intentionality of TUTs and motivation to perform well on tasks assessing mind wandering.</description><subject>Attention - physiology</subject><subject>Attention Control</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Cognitions</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>Comprehension</subject><subject>Experimental psychology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imagination</subject><subject>Intention</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mind</subject><subject>Mind Wandering</subject><subject>Motivation</subject><subject>Motivation - physiology</subject><subject>Multiple Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>Responses</subject><subject>Statistics as Topic</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Task Analysis</subject><subject>Thinking - physiology</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><subject>Universities</subject><subject>Visual task performance</subject><issn>0278-7393</issn><issn>1939-1285</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kT1vFDEQhi0EIsdBQw-yRIPQLXjW33RRFOBQIppDlJbXaycb9gvbi7h_jy8XgkSBC3ukeeadGb8IPQfyFgiV7371AykHQDxAK9BUV1Ar_hCtSC1VJammJ-hJSjcHiFD1GJ3UXFJCiVihcDnl7qfN3TRu8HbMfjyEtu_yfoPt2OLLrlzfSuRjN169x9th7jt3W5BwmCI-TcmnNJTChKeAdzZ9r76O0fc2-xbvrqfl6jo_RY-C7ZN_dveu0e7D-e7sU3Xx5eP27PSiskyoXDnRWCdrr0E2VAaigXKlCQfBmWsaL5xWDgCo5qFljLQi2CaomivSasfpGr0-ys5x-rH4lM3QJef73o5-WpIBCUQrShgt6Kt_0JtpiWXzW4prSrgS_6WEIIyVCWWh3hwpF6eUog9mjt1g494AMQeLzF-LCvzyTnJpBt_eo388KcCLI1B-3N2nzz8DkVSV6ddoc8zb2Zo57Z2NuXO9T26JsdhwaGYYGG6AgaS_AQwVo_Y</recordid><startdate>201509</startdate><enddate>201509</enddate><creator>Seli, Paul</creator><creator>Cheyne, James Allan</creator><creator>Xu, Mengran</creator><creator>Purdon, Christine</creator><creator>Smilek, Daniel</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0941-6398</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201509</creationdate><title>Motivation, Intentionality, and Mind Wandering: Implications for Assessments of Task-Unrelated Thought</title><author>Seli, Paul ; Cheyne, James Allan ; Xu, Mengran ; Purdon, Christine ; Smilek, Daniel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a468t-c6bac72e917b37f0913589051654cbbe6c98c111395fd440d6fabf82580d9c53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Attention - physiology</topic><topic>Attention Control</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Cognitions</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>Comprehension</topic><topic>Experimental psychology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imagination</topic><topic>Intention</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mind</topic><topic>Mind Wandering</topic><topic>Motivation</topic><topic>Motivation - physiology</topic><topic>Multiple Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>Responses</topic><topic>Statistics as Topic</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Task Analysis</topic><topic>Thinking - physiology</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><topic>Universities</topic><topic>Visual task performance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Seli, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheyne, James Allan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Mengran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Purdon, Christine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smilek, Daniel</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PsycArticles (via ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Seli, Paul</au><au>Cheyne, James Allan</au><au>Xu, Mengran</au><au>Purdon, Christine</au><au>Smilek, Daniel</au><au>Greene, Robert L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1073898</ericid><atitle>Motivation, Intentionality, and Mind Wandering: Implications for Assessments of Task-Unrelated Thought</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><date>2015-09</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1417</spage><epage>1425</epage><pages>1417-1425</pages><issn>0278-7393</issn><eissn>1939-1285</eissn><abstract>Researchers of mind wandering frequently assume that (a) participants are motivated to do well on the tasks they are given, and (b) task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) that occur during task performance reflect unintentional, unwanted thoughts that occur despite participants' best intentions to maintain task-focus. Given the relatively boring and tedious nature of most mind-wandering tasks, however, there is the possibility that some participants have little motivation to do well on such tasks, and that this lack of motivation might in turn result in increases specifically in intentional TUTs. In the present study, we explored these possibilities, finding that individuals reporting lower motivation to perform well on a sustained-attention task reported more intentional relative to unintentional TUTs compared with individuals reporting higher motivation. Interestingly, our results indicate that the extent to which participants engage in intentional versus unintentional TUTs does not differentially relate to performance: both types of off-task thought were found to be equally associated with performance decrements. Participants with low levels of task-motivation also engaged in more overall TUTs, however, and this increase in TUTs was associated with greater performance decrements. We discuss these findings in the context of the literature on mind wandering, highlighting the importance of assessing the intentionality of TUTs and motivation to perform well on tasks assessing mind wandering.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>25730306</pmid><doi>10.1037/xlm0000116</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0941-6398</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0278-7393
ispartof Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2015-09, Vol.41 (5), p.1417-1425
issn 0278-7393
1939-1285
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1710983043
source MEDLINE; PsycARTICLES
subjects Attention - physiology
Attention Control
Canada
Cognitions
Cognitive Processes
Comprehension
Experimental psychology
Female
Foreign Countries
Human
Humans
Imagination
Intention
Male
Mind
Mind Wandering
Motivation
Motivation - physiology
Multiple Regression Analysis
Reaction Time - physiology
Responses
Statistics as Topic
Students
Task Analysis
Thinking - physiology
Undergraduate Students
Universities
Visual task performance
title Motivation, Intentionality, and Mind Wandering: Implications for Assessments of Task-Unrelated Thought
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T18%3A29%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Motivation,%20Intentionality,%20and%20Mind%20Wandering:%20Implications%20for%20Assessments%20of%20Task-Unrelated%20Thought&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology.%20Learning,%20memory,%20and%20cognition&rft.au=Seli,%20Paul&rft.date=2015-09&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1417&rft.epage=1425&rft.pages=1417-1425&rft.issn=0278-7393&rft.eissn=1939-1285&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/xlm0000116&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1660449137%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1660449137&rft_id=info:pmid/25730306&rft_ericid=EJ1073898&rfr_iscdi=true