↓ Skip to main content

Self-Reported Stickiness of Mind-Wandering Affects Task Performance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Self-Reported Stickiness of Mind-Wandering Affects Task Performance
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00732
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marieke K. van Vugt, Nico Broers

Abstract

When asked to perform a certain task, we typically spend a decent amount of time thinking thoughts unrelated to that task-a phenomenon referred to as "mind-wandering." It is thought that this mind-wandering is driven at least in part by our unfinished goals and concerns. Previous studies have shown that just after presenting a participant with their own concerns, their reports of task-unrelated thinking increased somewhat. However, effects of these concerns on task performance were somewhat inconsistent. In this study we take the opposite approach, and examine whether task performance depends on the self-reported thought content. Specifically, a particularly intriguing aspect of mind-wandering that has hitherto received little attention is the difficulty of disengaging from it, in other words, the "stickiness" of the thoughts. While presenting participants with their own concerns was not associated with clear effects on task performance, we showed that the reports of off-task thinking and variability of response times increased with the amount of self-reported stickiness of thoughts. This suggests that the stickiness of mind-wandering is a relevant variable, and participants are able to meaningfully report on it.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
India 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 55 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Master 11 19%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 9 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 56%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Philosophy 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 27 November 2016.
All research outputs
#1,764,566
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#3,494
of 29,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,314
of 334,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#73
of 417 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 334,227 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 417 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.