| Title |
Mind-wandering, how do I measure thee with probes? Let me count the ways
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-017-0891-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yana Weinstein |
| Abstract |
In the past decade, a new field has formed to investigate the concept of mind-wandering, or task-unrelated thought. The state of mind-wandering is typically contrasted with being on-task, or paying attention to the task at hand, and is related to decrements in performance on cognitive tasks. The most widely used method for collecting mind-wandering data-the probe-caught method-involves stopping participants during a task and asking them where their attention is directed. In this review, 145 studies from 105 articles published between 2005 and 2015 were classified according to the framing and wording of the thought probe and response options. Five distinct methodologies were identified: neutral (in which counterbalancing was used to equally emphasize on-task and off-task states), dichotomous (say "yes" or "no" to one thought state), dichotomous (choose between two thought states), categorical, and scale. The review identifies at least 69 different methodological variants, catalogues the verbatim probes and response options used in each study, and suggests important considerations for future empirical work. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 11% |
| Germany | 2 | 11% |
| Ireland | 1 | 5% |
| Russia | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Italy | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 58% |
| Scientists | 7 | 37% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 222 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 54 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 34 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 30 | 13% |
| Researcher | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 12% |
| Unknown | 47 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 109 | 49% |
| Neuroscience | 18 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 10% |
| Unknown | 56 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2020.
All research outputs
#3,656,856
of 25,559,053 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#446
of 2,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,571
of 330,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#11
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,559,053 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,553 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.