Home

Menu

Loading wiki pages...

View
Wiki Version:
This page contains all the collected study materials and instructions from authors that we have compiled. We also include any comments from other contributors or follow up instructions that we have learned since the beginning of the project. Click "read more" below or choose the "Wiki" option above for further information. Contact Michael Andreychik ([mandreychik@fairfield.edu][1]) or Jordan Wagge ([Jordan.Wagge@avila.edu][2]) with questions or problems. **Abstract** In recent years, there has been an enormous increase in the number of studies examining mind wandering. Although participants’ reports of mind wandering are often assumed to largely reflect spontaneous, unintentional thoughts, many researchers’ conceptualizations of mind wandering have left open the possibility that at least some of these reports reflect deliberate, intentional thought. Critically, however, in most investigations on the topic, researchers have not separately assessed each type of mind wandering; instead, they have measured mind wandering as a unitary construct, thereby conflating intentional and unintentional types. We report the first compelling evidence that an experimental manipulation can have qualitatively different effects on intentional and unintentional types of mind wandering. This result provides clear evidence that researchers interested in understanding mind wandering need to consider the distinction between unintentional and intentional occurrences of this phenomenon. **Notes from the author** After digging through my external hard drives, I managed to find the E-Prime programs that we used in our PSCI study (see attached). I don't currently have an E-Prime license, so I'm not able to open them to verify that everything is in order (although I don't see why it wouldn't be). As far as potential moderators go, I would think the following two variables might play an important role: 1. A question asking participants, after completion of the sequential (easy) SART, whether they were aware of the predictable nature of the NOGO digits (i.e., the 3's). My guess is that Ps who were aware of the predictable nature of the NOGO digits would show particularly high rates of intentional mind wandering (MW) and low rates of unintentional MW. 2. A question assessing Ps' motivation to perform well on the tasks (this is likely most important in the easy condition). Here, I imagine that Ps who report higher motivation in the easy SART condition would likewise show higher rates of intentional MW and lower rates of unintentional MW. Also: The first author suggests that the study should not be run at the end of the semester, as he feels that participants are then not paying attention to the materials. **Notes from the CREP Team** The authors have sent us the original materials (see note above) to conduct the replication study. These materials are available below. Note that the original study was run on E-Prime, so the files sent by the authors can only be run if contributors have an E-Prime license. CREP contributors without access to E-Prime who wish to conduct the study should be aware that the method section of the paper provides adequate detail to re-create the materials in other software packages that do not require a license to use. For example, it should be feasible to re-create the materials in programs like PsychoPy ([www.psychopy.org][3]) or OpenSesame ([osdoc.cogsci.nl][4]). If you do create your own version of the materials in a different program, this difference should be noted in your write up of the project. And, if you do create your own materials, please contact either Michael Andreychik ([mandreychik@fairfield.edu][5]) or Nathan MacPherson ([nathan.macpherson@fairfield.edu][6]) so that the materials can be made available on this website. **Materials** The materials below have been obtained from the first author. - [Sequential SART (easy)][7] - [SART (Difficult)][8] The materials below provide IRB templates. - [Sample IRB Protocol][9] - [Sample Consent Form][10] The full Seli, Risko, and Smilek (2016) paper can be accessed [here][11] (may require a library subscription) [1]: mailto:mandreychik@fairfield.edu [2]: mailto:Jordan.Wagge@avila.edu [3]: http://www.psychopy.org [4]: http://osdoc.cogsci.nl [5]: mailto:mandreychik@fairfield.edu [6]: mailto:nathan.macpherson@fairfield.edu [7]: https://osf.io/qgthk/ [8]: https://osf.io/73ms9/ [9]: https://osf.io/rkm35/ [10]: https://osf.io/y5hn3/ [11]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797616634068
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.