| Title |
Studying in the region of proximal learning reduces mind wandering
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Memory & Cognition, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13421-016-0589-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Judy Xu, Janet Metcalfe |
| Abstract |
Insofar as mind wandering has been linked to poor learning, finding ways to reduce the propensity to mind wander should have implications for improving learning. We investigated the possibility that studying materials at an appropriate level of difficulty with respect to the individual's capabilities-that is, studying in the region of proximal learning (RPL)-might reduce mind wandering. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants were probed for their attentional state while they studied blocks of English-Spanish word pairs that were (a) easy, (b) in the RPL, or (c) difficult. We found that studying materials in the RPL was associated with reduced mind wandering. Test performance on items studied while mind wandering was also poorer. In Experiment 3, we investigated the relation between differences in participants' mastery and mind wandering. We found that high performers mind wandered more when studying the easier word pairs, whereas low performers mind wandered more when studying the difficult items. These results indicate that the RPL is specific to the individual's level of mastery and that mind wandering occurs when people are outside that region. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 14% |
| Chile | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Professor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 22% |
| Unknown | 15 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 37 | 45% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 07 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,058,293
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#142
of 1,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,495
of 399,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 399,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.