1. Mind-wandering and Academic Performance
Eva Amaya Rodriguez
University of Guelph
For colour schemes
BACKGROUND
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
Mind-wandering (MW) is defined as “the mental act of shifting one’s attention away from a focal external task, inward toward internal cognitions” (Wammes, Boucher et al., 2016).
Thirty to fifty percent of our daily thought consists of MW instances (Smallwood & Andrews-Hanna, 2013).
MW has educational consequences, such as poor reading performance, working memory deficits, sustained attention problems, and academic performance (Lindquist & McLean; Mooneyham & Schooler, 2013).
Literature Review
Lindquist and McLean (2011) had participants watch a video lecture, report when they experienced a task-unrelated image and thought, and complete a retention test. Results showed that as MW decreased, students interest in the course increased, sat near the front of the lecture hall, and took more notes.
Wammes, Boucher and colleagues (2016) randomly interrupted students during a live lecture to study their attentional levels. They studied MW levels throughout a full semester and had access to student’s examinations. They found that as MW increased throughout the semester, academic performance suffered.
Participants
43 undergraduate students (36 females, 7 males) at the University of Guelph were recruited via the SONA participant pool and received credit for their participation.
Video lecture
Video lecture, acquired from Youtube, had five randomly embedded probes. All probes read: “Probe X: Was my mind wandering?” and were 10 seconds in length.
TUIT frequency recording sheet
Table with five rows in which participants indicated whether their mind had wandered by circling a yes or no (see Table 1).
Questionnaire sheet
Questions asked about age, gender, average GPA, notetaking habits, interest in video, and seating positon.
Retention test
Test with 41 questions based on video content and formatted with multiple choice and true and false questions.
Procedure
Participants were separated into two categories, one in which they were encouraged to take notes and another in which they were not. Participants were brought into an artificial lecture setting (see Figure 1) and instructed to attend to the video lecture as their retention will be tested. The video was interrupted at random intervals in which the participants were instructed to indicate whether their minds had wandered since the last probe. At the end, participants were given the retention test and 10 minutes to complete. Their accuracy of video content was tested.
Showed a moderate, negative correlation between MW and notetaking (r = -0.38) and MW and interest (r = -0.47). Summarized in Figure 2. This could mean that those who mind-wandered less, actively wrote more notes and were more interested in the video.
Showed a weak, negative correlation with seat position (r = 0.16), which could mean that those who MW less often, also sat in the front of the class.
Showed no correlation between MW and the retention test (r = -0.09). MW
Notetaking Interest Seating
CONCLUSIONS
Implication for Education
Recommends that instructors insert blanks in their lecture notes to encourage students to take good notes; that instructors vary their presentation delivery, and interest by including multimedia content; rearrange seating to a circle have all students within view and involved (Wammes, Boucher et al., 2016).
Limitations
Limited options to choose from (yes/no); simulated lecture setting means we cannot generalize; non-representative sample of undergraduate students; few participants overall.
Future Research
Consider how motivation affects MW and whether the effect carries onto other subjects.
Consider other relevant variables such as technology, peers, presentation delivery etc.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this investigation was to determine the relationship between mind-wandering and academic performance by exploring whether notetaking, seating position, and interest affects student’s likelihood to mind-wander during lectures. The researcher suggests that academic performance will suffer for those whose mind wandered more often.
Probe
Did your mind wander?
Probe 1
YES/NO
Probe 2
Probe 3
Probe 4
Probe 5
REFERENCES
Lindquist, S. I., & McLean, J. P. (2011). Daydreaming and its correlates in an educational environment. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), 158–167.
Mooneyham, B. W., & Schooler, J. W. (2013). The costs and benefits of mind-wandering: A review. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 67(1), 11–18.
Smallwood, J., & Andrews-Hanna, J. (2013). Not all minds that wander are lost: The importance of a balanced perspective on the mind-wandering state. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(AUG), 1–6.
Wammes, J. D., Boucher, P. O., Seli, P., Cheyne, J. A., & Smilek, D. (2016). Mind wandering during lectures I: Changes in rates across an entire semester. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 2(1), 13–32. Retrieved from
Table 1. TUIT frequency recording sheet.
Figure 1. Set up of artificial lecture setting.
Figure 2. Correlation between MW and notetaking (r = -0.38) and MW and interest (r = -0.47).