Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms
Recent research has examined how often mind-wandering occurs about past versus future events. However, mind-wandering may also be atemporal, although previous investigations of this possibility have not yielded consistent results. Indeed, it is unclear what proportion of mind-wandering is atemporal,...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2013-10-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00742/full |
_version_ | 1819274862324088832 |
---|---|
author | Jonathan David Jackson Yana eWeinstein David Anthony Balota |
author_facet | Jonathan David Jackson Yana eWeinstein David Anthony Balota |
author_sort | Jonathan David Jackson |
collection | DOAJ |
description | Recent research has examined how often mind-wandering occurs about past versus future events. However, mind-wandering may also be atemporal, although previous investigations of this possibility have not yielded consistent results. Indeed, it is unclear what proportion of mind-wandering is atemporal, and also how an atemporal response option would affect the future oriented bias often reported during low-demand tasks used to measure mind-wandering. The present study examined self-reported (Experiment 1) and probe-caught (Experiment 2) mind-wandering using the low-demand Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) in younger (18-30) and older (50-73) adults in an experimental paradigm developed to measure mind-wandering in a sample using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Across self-reported and probe-caught mind-wandering, the atemporal response option was used at least as frequently as past or future mind-wandering options. Although older adults reported far fewer mind-wandering events, they showed a very similar temporal pattern to younger adults. Most importantly, inclusion of the atemporal report option affected performance on the SART and selectively eliminated the prospective bias in self-reported mind-wandering, but not in probe-caught mind-wandering. These results suggest that both young and older participants are often not thinking of past or future events when mind-wandering, but are thinking of events that cannot easily be categorized as either. |
first_indexed | 2024-12-23T23:15:10Z |
format | Article |
id | doaj.art-9e2e223ca9bd4f8aa0c1690e9f23ddf7 |
institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
issn | 1664-1078 |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-12-23T23:15:10Z |
publishDate | 2013-10-01 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | Article |
series | Frontiers in Psychology |
spelling | doaj.art-9e2e223ca9bd4f8aa0c1690e9f23ddf72022-12-21T17:26:32ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782013-10-01410.3389/fpsyg.2013.0074260783Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigmsJonathan David Jackson0Yana eWeinstein1David Anthony Balota2Washington University in St. LouisUniversity of Massachusetts-LowellWashington University in St. LouisRecent research has examined how often mind-wandering occurs about past versus future events. However, mind-wandering may also be atemporal, although previous investigations of this possibility have not yielded consistent results. Indeed, it is unclear what proportion of mind-wandering is atemporal, and also how an atemporal response option would affect the future oriented bias often reported during low-demand tasks used to measure mind-wandering. The present study examined self-reported (Experiment 1) and probe-caught (Experiment 2) mind-wandering using the low-demand Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) in younger (18-30) and older (50-73) adults in an experimental paradigm developed to measure mind-wandering in a sample using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Across self-reported and probe-caught mind-wandering, the atemporal response option was used at least as frequently as past or future mind-wandering options. Although older adults reported far fewer mind-wandering events, they showed a very similar temporal pattern to younger adults. Most importantly, inclusion of the atemporal report option affected performance on the SART and selectively eliminated the prospective bias in self-reported mind-wandering, but not in probe-caught mind-wandering. These results suggest that both young and older participants are often not thinking of past or future events when mind-wandering, but are thinking of events that cannot easily be categorized as either.http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00742/fullAgingmind-wanderingprospectionSARTtask-unrelated thoughtretrospection |
spellingShingle | Jonathan David Jackson Yana eWeinstein David Anthony Balota Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms Frontiers in Psychology Aging mind-wandering prospection SART task-unrelated thought retrospection |
title | Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms |
title_full | Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms |
title_fullStr | Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms |
title_full_unstemmed | Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms |
title_short | Can mind-wandering be timeless? Atemporal focus and aging in mind-wandering paradigms |
title_sort | can mind wandering be timeless atemporal focus and aging in mind wandering paradigms |
topic | Aging mind-wandering prospection SART task-unrelated thought retrospection |
url | http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00742/full |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jonathandavidjackson canmindwanderingbetimelessatemporalfocusandaginginmindwanderingparadigms AT yanaeweinstein canmindwanderingbetimelessatemporalfocusandaginginmindwanderingparadigms AT davidanthonybalota canmindwanderingbetimelessatemporalfocusandaginginmindwanderingparadigms |