Mind wandering and executive dysfunction predict children’s performance in the metronome response task

2022 ◽  
Vol 213 ◽  
pp. 105257
Author(s):  
McLennon Wilson ◽  
Linda Sosa-Hernandez ◽  
Heather A. Henderson
Keyword(s):  
Executive Dysfunction ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Response Task

scholarly journals The validity of the online thought-probing procedure of mind wandering is not threatened by variations of probe rate and probe framing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Lena Schubert ◽  
Gidon T. Frischkorn ◽  
Jan Rummel
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Time Variability ◽  
Ongoing Task ◽  
Reaction Time Variability ◽  
Measurement Variation ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Great Heterogeneity ◽  
Response Task ◽  
Thought Probes

Recently, there has been a surge of interest in the measurement of mind-wandering during ongoing tasks. The frequently used online thought-probing procedure (OTPP), in which individuals are probed on whether their thoughts are on-task or not while performing an ongoing task, has repeatedly been criticized, because variations in the frequency of thought probes and the order in which on-task and off-task thoughts are referred to have been shown to affect mind-wandering rates. Hitherto, it is unclear whether this susceptibility to measurement variation only affects mean response rates in probe-caught mind-wandering or poses an actual threat to the validity of the OTPP, endangering the replicability and generalizability of study results. Here we show in a sample of 177 students that variations of the frequency or framing of thought probes do not affect the validity of the OTPP. While we found that more frequent thought probing reduced the rate of probe-caught mind-wandering, we did not replicate the effect that mind-wandering is more likely to be reported when off-task thoughts are referred to first rather than second. Crucially, associations between probe-caught mind-wandering and task performance, as well as associations between probe-caught mind-wandering and covariates (trait mind-wandering, reaction-time variability in the metronome-response task, working-memory capacity) did not change with variations of the probing procedure. Therefore, it seems unlikely that the great heterogeneity in the way the OTPP is implemented across different studies endangers the replicability and generalizability of study results. Data and analysis code are available at https://osf.io/7w8bm/.

scholarly journals Effect of tDCS over the Right Inferior Parietal Lobule on Mind-Wandering Propensity

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Coulborn ◽  
Howard Bowman ◽  
Chris Miall ◽  
Davinia Fernández-Espejo
Keyword(s):  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Inferior Parietal Lobule ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Default Mode ◽  
Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽  
Parietal Lobule ◽  
Response Task ◽  
Thought Probes ◽  
The Right ◽  
Subjective Reports

Mind-wandering is associated with switching our attention to internally directed thoughts and is by definition an intrinsic, self-generated cognitive function. Interestingly, previous research showed that it may be possible to modulate its propensity externally, with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) targeting different regions in the default mode and executive control networks. However, these studies used highly heterogeneous montages (targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), the right inferior parietal lobule (IPL), or both concurrently), often showed contradicting results, and in many cases failed to replicate. Our study aimed to establish whether tDCS of the default mode network, via targeting the right IPL alone, could modulate mind-wandering propensity using a within-subjects double-blind, counterbalanced design. Participants completed a sustained attention to response task (SART) interspersed with thought-probes to capture their subjective reports of mind-wandering before and after receiving anodal, cathodal, or sham tDCS over the right IPL (with the reference over the left cheek). We found evidence for the lack of an effect of stimulation on subjective reports of mind-wandering (JZS-BF01 = 5.19), as well as on performance on the SART task (errors (JZS-BF01 = 6.79) and reaction time (JZS-BF01 = 5.94). Overall, we failed to replicate previous reports of successful modulations of mind-wandering propensity with tDCS over the IPL, instead providing evidence in support of the lack of an effect. This, and other recent unsuccessful replications call into question whether it is indeed possible to externally modulate spontaneous or self-generated cognitive processes.

Going AWOL in the Brain: Mind Wandering Reduces Cortical Analysis of External Events

2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 458-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Smallwood ◽  
Emily Beach ◽  
Jonathan W. Schooler ◽  
Todd C. Handy
Keyword(s):  
External Environment ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Self Report ◽  
P300 Amplitude ◽  
Control Analysis ◽  
Potential Component ◽  
Response Task ◽  
The Mind ◽  
Subjective Reports

Converging evidence from neuroscience suggests that our attention to the outside world waxes and wanes over time. We examined whether these periods of “mind wandering” are associated with reduced cortical analysis of the external environment. Participants performed a sustained attention to response task in which they responded to frequent “nontargets” (digits 0–9) and withheld responses for infrequent “targets” (the letter X). Mind wandering was defined both behaviorally, indicated by a failure to withhold a response to a target, and subjectively, via self-report at a thought probe. The P300 event-related potential component for nontargets was reduced prior to both the behavioral and subjective reports of mind wandering, relative to periods of being “on-task.” Regression analysis of P300 amplitude revealed significant common variance between behavioral and subjective markers of mind wandering, suggesting that both markers reflect a common underlying mental state. Finally, control analysis revealed that the effect of mind wandering on the P300 could not be ascribed to changes in motor activity nor was it associated with general arousal. Our data suggest that when trying to engage attention in a sustained manner, the mind will naturally ebb and flow in the depth of cognitive analysis it applies to events in the external environment.

scholarly journals Local use-dependent activity triggers mind wandering: resource depletion or executive dysfunction?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esperanza Jubera-Garcia ◽  
Luc Vermeylen ◽  
Philippe Peigneux ◽  
wim gevers ◽  
Filip Van Opstal
Keyword(s):  
Objective Measure ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Executive Dysfunction ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Pupillary Response ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Local Resources ◽  
Thought Probes ◽  
Local Use

Mind wandering (MW) is a highly prevalent phenomenon despite its negative consequences on behaviour. Current views about its origin share the idea that MW occurs due to changes in the executive functions system. Here, we argue that not all instances of MW are necessarily related to changes in that system. Combining results from MW and sleep research, we propose that MW could also be initiated by the depletion of resources in primary task-related networks. To test this hypothesis, participants performed four sessions of the texture discrimination task (TDT) on a day. The TDT is a perceptual learning task in which performance is related to the local build-up of sleep-pressure. During the TDT, MW was recorded in both a subjective (i.e., with thought probes) and an objective (i.e., phasic pupillary response) manner. Results showed that the pattern of behaviour in the TDT was mirrored in the objective measure of MW. Also for the subjective measure the pattern was similar to that of task performance, but it failed to reach significance. These results demonstrate that not all MW is necessarily related to changes in the executive system and support the hypothesis that MW can be related to the depletion of local resources.

scholarly journals The Neural Markers of Self-Caught and Probe-Caught Mind Wandering: An ERP Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 1329
Author(s):  
Yong Liu ◽  
Jia Zhao ◽  
Xinqi Zhou ◽  
Xiaolin Liu ◽  
Hong Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Right Hemisphere ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Neural Markers ◽  
Response Task ◽  
The Impact

Mind-wandering (MW) is a common phenomenon, defined as task-unrelated thoughts. This study is based on event-related potentials (ERPs), using modified sustained attention to response task (modified SART, mSART) to discuss the neural patterns of different types of MW. In the current study, we defined the MW realized by participants as self-caught MW, and the MW measurement acquired by probes as probe-caught MW. The behavioral results showed that the reaction times (RTs) during self-caught MW were greater than those during non-self-caught MW. The ERP results showed that during self-caught MW, the mean amplitudes of N1 decreased significantly, indicating that the participants’ attention had deviated from the current task. The increase in the mean amplitudes of P2 during self-caught MW indicated lower vigilance. We also found that the mean amplitudes of N300 reduced during self-caught MW, which indicated that cognitive control or monitoring might be affected by self-caught MW. The average amplitudes of P300 were significantly lower during probe-caught MW than during on-task, indicating the impact on high-level cognitive processing. In addition, the amplitudes of N1, P2, and N300 in anterior regions were greater than those in posterior regions. P300 amplitudes during probe-caught MW in the right hemisphere were greater than those of the left hemisphere. In summary, our research results demonstrated that alertness and cognitive processing decreased during both self-caught MW and probe-caught MW. ERPs were statistically different under the conditions of self-caught MW and probe-caught MW. The current study provided new insights into the relationship between MW and neural markers. It was the first study exploring the ERP correlates between self-caught MW and probe-caught MW based on mSART.

Attenuated Face Processing during Mind Wandering

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 1691-1703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Denkova ◽  
Emily G. Brudner ◽  
Kristen Zayan ◽  
Joseph Dunn ◽  
Amishi P. Jha
Keyword(s):  
Face Processing ◽  
Visual Processing ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Perceptual Processing ◽  
Neural Responses ◽  
N170 Component ◽  
Complex Stimuli ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Response Task ◽  
The Impact

Mind wandering (MW) has been recently investigated in many studies. It has been suggested that, during MW, processing of perceptual stimuli is attenuated in favor of internal thoughts, a phenomenon referred to as perceptual decoupling. Perceptual decoupling has been investigated in ERP studies, which have used relatively simple perceptual stimuli, yet it remains unclear if MW can impact the perceptual processing of complex stimuli with real-world relevance. Here, we investigated the impact of MW on behavioral and neural responses to faces. Thirty-six participants completed a novel sustained attention to response task with faces. They were asked to respond to upright faces (nontargets) and withhold responses to inverted faces (targets) and to report intermittently if they were “On task” or “Off task.” Behavioral analyses revealed greater intraindividual coefficient of variation for nontarget faces preceding Off task versus On task. ERP analyses focused primarily on the N170 component associated with face processing but also included the P1 and P3 components. The results revealed attenuated amplitudes to nontarget faces preceding Off task versus On task for the N170, but not for the P3 or P1. These findings suggest decoupled visual processing of faces during MW, which has implications for social neuroscience research.

scholarly journals The Association of Motivation with Mind Wandering in Trait and State Levels

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshikazu Kawagoe ◽  
Keiichi Onoda ◽  
Shuhei Yamaguchi
Keyword(s):  
Sustained Attention ◽  
Sampling Method ◽  
Experience Sampling ◽  
Experience Sampling Method ◽  
State Level ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
The State ◽  
Response Task ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
State Motivation

Mind wandering is a phenomenon in which attention drifts away from a given task towards task-unrelated thoughts. Recent studies have demonstrated that mind wandering occurs during tasks in which participants are demotivated. However, motivation ranges on a continuum from trait to state. We examined the association between trait/state motivation and trait/state mind wandering. We used common questionnaires and an experience sampling method through a sustained attention response task for measuring those indices. Through correlation analyses, we demonstrated an association between motivation and mind wandering within the same dimension (trait and state, respectively) but found no association across dimensions. Our results indicate that motivation in personality affects the occurrence of daily mind wandering, but not state mind wandering, which is affected by state motivation. Although the relationship between motivation and mind wandering is substantial, mind wandering at the state-level might be a more phasic phenomenon than expected, driven by a range of factors such as state motivation.

scholarly journals Propensity to intentional and unintentional mind-wandering differs in arousal and executive vigilance tasks

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0258734
Author(s):  
Víctor Martínez-Pérez ◽  
Damián Baños ◽  
Almudena Andreu ◽  
Miriam Tortajada ◽  
Lucía B. Palmero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vigilance Task ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Progressive Increase ◽  
Resource Control ◽  
Time On Task ◽  
Vigilance Decrement ◽  
Task Execution ◽  
Attentional Resources ◽  
Response Task ◽  
Psychomotor Vigilance

We typically observe a decrement in vigilance with time-on-task, which favors the propensity for mind-wandering, i.e., the shifting of attention from the task at hand to task-unrelated thoughts. Here, we examined participants’ mind-wandering, either intentional or unintentional, while performing vigilance tasks that tap different components of vigilance. Intentional mind-wandering is expected mainly when the arousal component is involved, whereas unintentional mind-wandering is expected mainly in tasks involving the executive component. The Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) assessed the arousal component, whereas the Sustained Attention to Response task (SART) assessed the executive component of vigilance. The two types of mind-wandering were probed throughout task execution. The results showed that the overall rate of mind-wandering was higher in the PVT than in the SART. Intentional mind-wandering was higher with the PVT than with the SART, whereas unintentional mind-wandering was higher with the SART than with the PVT. Regarding mind-wandering as a function of vigilance decrement with time-on-task, unintentional mind-wandering in the PVT increased between blocks 1 and 2 and then stabilized, whereas a progressive increase was observed in the SART. Regarding intentional mind-wandering, a progressive increase was only observed in the SART. The differential patterns of intentional and unintentional mind-wandering in both tasks suggest that, intentional mind wandering occurs mainly in arousal tasks in which propensity to mind-wander has little impact on task performance. However, unintentional mind-wandering occurs mainly in executive tasks as a result of a failure of cognitive control, which promotes attentional resources to be diverted toward mind-wandering. These results are discussed in the context of the resource-control model of mind-wandering.

Propensity to intentional and unintentional mind-wandering differ in arousal and executive vigilance tasks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Víctor Martínez-Pérez ◽  
Damián Baños ◽  
Almudena Andreu ◽  
Miriam Tortajada ◽  
Lucia Beatriz Palmero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Executive Control ◽  
Vigilance Task ◽  
Mind Wandering ◽  
Control Model ◽  
Resource Control ◽  
Control Methods ◽  
Task Execution ◽  
Attentional Resources ◽  
Response Task ◽  
Psychomotor Vigilance

Background: The current study examined people’s propensity to mind wander when they perform vigilance tasks that tap different components of vigilance, namely arousal or executive. We suggest that the propensity to mind-wander may occur not only spontaneously (unintentional), but also deliberately (intentional) and that this distinction may have considerable theoretical implications. Thus, while intentional mind-wandering could arise from a lack of motivation and monotonicity of the task, unintentional mind-wandering could be driven mainly by a failure of executive control. Methods: Participants performed the Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) to assess the arousal component of vigilance, and the Sustained Attention to Response task (SART) to assess the executive component of vigilance. Two types of mind wandering were probed throughout the task execution, intentional and unintentional. Results: The rates of overall mind-wandering were greater for the PVT than for the SART. Although there was greater propensity to develop unintentional than intentional mind-wandering in both tasks, propensity to intentional mind-wandering was higher with the PVT than with the SART, whereas the ratio of unintentional mind-wandering was higher with the SART than with the PVT. Finally, regarding unintentional mind wandering, in the PVT, the most pronounced increment occurred between blocks 1 and 2, and thereafter it stabilized. In the SART, a rather progressive increment was observed as the task progressed. Regarding intentional mind wandering, progressive increment was observed mainly in the SART.Conclusions: The differential patterns of intentional and unintentional mind wandering as a function of task suggest that, intentional mind wandering occurs mainly in monotonous tasks where propensity to mind wander has little impact on task performance. However, unintentional mind wandering is the result of a failure to keep control on the primary executive task and therefore attentional resources deviate to mind wander, the default mode. These results support and extend the Thompson et al.’s (2015) resource-control model.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document