Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37749477›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2024

Mind wandering may both promote and impair learning.

Alexander Soemer, Christian Gericke, Ulrich Schiefele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Alexander SoemerHector Research Institute of Education Sciences and Psychology, University of Tübingen, Europastr. 6, 72072, Tübingen, Germany. alexander.soemer@uni-tuebingen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-9742-1746
Christian GerickeDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, 14476, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4961-4068
Ulrich SchiefeleDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, 14476, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8797-872X

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFGDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SO-1552/1-1; Schi 283/18-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present investigation deals with individual differences in habitual (trait-level) mind wandering and their effects on learning. We hypothesized that the 'positive-constructive' type of habitual mind wandering would promote task-related thinking and the 'poor-attention' type to promote task-unrelated thinking. This hypothesis was tested in a study with 200 participants who rated different aspects of their mind wandering in daily life in one session and completed a reading study in a second session. The reading study included thought probes, retrospective questions about readers' thought contents, and comprehension tests after reading. In line with our hypothesis, data analysis revealed that some forms of positive-constructive mind wandering were positively associated with text-related thought, whereas poor-attention mind wandering was positively associated with text-unrelated thought. The present results add to the literature by emphasizing different types of trait-level mind wandering and their potentially opposite effects on learning.

Indexed as

AttentionCognitionComprehensionHumansLearningRetrospective StudiesComprehension monitoringDaydreamingElaborationMind wanderingReading comprehension

Identifiers

PMID37749477
PMCPMC10896859

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.