Topic 6: Mind Wandering Flashcards
What is mind wandering?
is sometimes referred to as off-task thought, task-unrelated thought, stimulus-independent thought, or daydreaming
distinction between coupled attention and decoupled attention
methodological note: one major challenges associated with MW research is the lack of experimental control
What are the different ways that mind wandering has been conceived of?
attention decoupled from the environment
a failure of executive control
type of mental process characterized by a particular kind of flow, or movement, of thought across topics
by taking a family resemblance approach
What are associations with various kinds of changes involved in mind wandering?
behavioral (performance, response time, general behavioral variability, eye-movements)
neural (default mode activity, ERPs, oscillations)
frequency of MW reported varies across certain clinical populations (depressed, anxious, OCD, ADD), as well as across the lifespan
What are the possible costs of mind wandering?
academic achievement, workplace productivity, distracted driving, negative effects on mood, reduced vigilance, general impairments in comprehension, performance, etc.
What are the possible benefits of mind wandering?
creativity, problem solving, insight, planning, dishabituation, memory consolidation, positive effects on mood, associative and/or divergent thinking, etc.
How is self report used to study mind wandering?
is the primary means of measurement used in MW research, though reports are sometimes considered in the context of other converging measures (e.g., performance, neural activity, etc.) for validation purposes
How are experience sampling paradigms used to study mind wandering?
use pseudo-randomly timed probes embedded within another experimental task to measure self-reported MW
MW responses to ~20-50% of probes is typical
other methods are less commonly used but also viable (self-caught, retrospective, trait-based measure, etc.)
How are measures of mind wandering validated?
for many tasks, reports of wind wandering correlate with performance deficits
this can be taken as converging evidence that somewhat “validates” (or corroborates) the reports
however, the relationship between performance and MW is not always the same (e.g. MW during an easy task isn’t always associated with performance problems)
What is triangulation?
can also be used to attempt to “validate” the reports, which involves looking for multiple converging measures (e.g., reports, performance, and neural activity)
What is a sustained attention to response task (SART)?
if often used to study mind wandering
participants are presented with a series of digits and are asked to press a button in response to everything except for the target number
failure to inhibit the (prepotent) response to targets is take as behavioral evidence for mind wandering
self reports of mental state are also periodically taken
in theory, looking at both the self reports and behavioral data should allow researchers to compare period of time in which participants are focused (i.e., on task) with periods of time in which they are not (i.e. off task or mind wandering)
What is the effect of attention on early sensory processing?
the amplitude of the P1 is reduced when experimental participants report having been “mind wandering” immediately after a visual stimulus is presented, relative to when they report having been “on-task”
What is the effect of attention of higher-level processing?
the P300, which is related to processing meaning, is also attenuate just prior to reports of mind wandering
notice this experiment had three possible responses for self reports: on-task, zoning out, tuning out
in this context, the difference between zoning out and tuning out relates to awareness
methodological note: what are the advantages/disadvantages to trying to more precisely report mental state (e.g., three possible response options vs. two)
What is the Christoff et al. (2009) study on fMRI and mind wandering?
combined the SART paradigm with fMRI
in addition to periodically reporting task focus (on-task or off-task), participants in were also asked to incorporate the dimension of awareness into their reports (i.e. being aware or unaware of your attentional focus just prior to being probed)
the default network was indeed found to be more active just prior to reports of mind wandering, as well as regions associated with executive control
notice the involvement of some familiar structures that can be considered part of the default network (PFC, ACC, TPJ, etc.)
What is the Christoff et al. (2009) study on fMRI and awareness of mind wandering?
can contrast what the brain looked like just prior to reporting MW with awareness, as compared to MW without awareness
MW without awareness was associated with stronger neural activation of both default mode and executive control regions
may help explain why we can sometimes get so “lost” in deep mind wandering episodes
What is the intentionality and awareness of mind wandering?
it has been argued that mind wandering that is of an unintentional nature (“spontaneous” mind wandering) may be somewhat different than mind wandering of an intentional nature (“deliberate” mind wandering)
it may also be the case that some people have better control over their mind wandering, and are able to more flexibly engage/disengage in it when appropriate
methodological note: is intentionality the same as awareness
What were the methods of the Golchert et al. (2017) study on the intentionality of mind wandering?
asked participants to complete a questionnaire designed to assess trait-levels of both spontaneous and deliberate mind wandering
this attempted to quantify each participant’s relative propensity to engage in each type of mind wandering
they the used fMRI to quantify both cortical thickness and functional connectivity in the brains of these participants, looking for differences as a function of tendency to engage in each type of mind wandering
What were the results of the Golchert et al. (2017) study on the intentionality of mind wandering?
participants reporting more frequent deliberate MW were associated with thicker cortical matter in PFC
may implicate a more robust integration of the default mode network and the fronto-parietal executive network
this could help explain why these individuals may have better control over their mind wandering
In the Golchert et al. (2017) study, what were participants reporting more frequent spontaneous mind wandering associated with?
cortical thinning in regions involved with cognitive control (parietal and posterior temporal left-hemisphere regions)
greater connectivity between the intraparietal sulcus and a region of cortex that makes contact with both limbic and default mode regions
What were the conclusions of the Golchert et al. (2017) study on the intentionality of mind wandering?
summarizing these results, various neurological differences seem to be associated with individual differences in mind wandering behavior
in addition to structural differences (gray matter thickness), some differences in functional connectivity were also observed
highlights the value in taking multiple kinds of imaging measures (not just “hot spots” activation), as well as the richness of a concept like mind wandering
although we tend to think of mind wandering as “one thing”, these results provide yet another examine of the difficulty in operationalizing cognitive concepts that may seem relatively straightforward
What are the various other methods that are used to study mind wandering?
TMS: can we increase/decrease MW by increasing/decreasing activity in certain neural regions?
eye-tracking: able to measure changes in where people look, for how long, pupil dilation, etc.
fNIRS: can measure default mode activation
in various ecologically valid contexts (e.g., while in a driving simulator, a classroom, etc.)
How could/should we characterize boredom?
structural equation modelling supports the idea boredom is a distinct construct from apathy, anhedonia, and depression
seems to hare a close relationship with arousal and mind wandering
is often found to be elevated in various clinical populations (e.g. ADHD, those with TBIs, etc.)
can boredom be explained as a failure of executive control?
