Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29765144›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Mind Wandering and Task-Focused Attention: ERP Correlates.

Óscar F Gonçalves, Gabriel Rêgo, Tatiana Conde, Jorge Leite, Sandra Carvalho, Olívia Morgan Lapenta, Paulo S Boggio

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Predicting task-general mind-wandering with EEG.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. The experimental study of consciousness: Is psychology travelling back to the future?International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Óscar F GonçalvesPsychological Neuroscience Laboratory- CIPsi, School of Psychology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal. goncalves@psi.uminho.pt.ORCID 0000-0003-2735-9155
Gabriel RêgoSocial and Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Center for Health and Biological Sciences, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Tatiana CondeSocial and Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Center for Health and Biological Sciences, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Jorge LeitePsychological Neuroscience Laboratory- CIPsi, School of Psychology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Sandra CarvalhoPsychological Neuroscience Laboratory- CIPsi, School of Psychology, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal.
Olívia Morgan LapentaSocial and Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Center for Health and Biological Sciences, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Paulo S BoggioSocial and Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Center for Health and Biological Sciences, Mackenzie Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie · BRHarvard University · USUniversity of Lisbon · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies looking at how Mind Wandering (MW) impacts performance in distinct Focused Attention (FA) systems, using the Attention Network Task (ANT), showed that the presence of pure MW thoughts did not impact the overall performance of ANT (alert, orienting and conflict) performance. However, it still remains unclear if the lack of interference of MW in the ANT, reported at the behavioral level, has a neurophysiological correspondence. We hypothesize that a distinct cortical processing may be required to meet attentional demands during MW. The objective of the present study was to test if, given similar levels of ANT performance, individuals predominantly focusing on MW or FA show distinct cortical processing. Thirty-three healthy participants underwent an EEG high-density acquisition while they were performing the ANT. MW was assessed following the ANT using an adapted version of the Resting State Questionnaire (ReSQ). The following ERP's were analyzed: pN1, pP1, P1, N1, pN, and P3. At the behavioral level, participants were slower and less accurate when responding to incongruent than to congruent targets (conflict effect), benefiting from the presentation of the double (alerting effect) and spatial (orienting effect) cues. Consistent with the behavioral data, ERP's waves were discriminative of distinct attentional effects. However, these results remained true irrespective of the MW condition, suggesting that MW imposed no additional cortical demand in alert, orienting, and conflict attention tasks.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionCuesElectroencephalographyFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsOrientation, SpatialTask Performance and AnalysisWandering BehaviorYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29765144
PMCPMC5953943
OpenAlexW2803429528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.