Validating a visual version of the metronome response task

Article

Abstract

The metronome response task (MRT)—a sustained-attention task that requires participants to produce a response in synchrony with an audible metronome—was recently developed to index response variability in the context of studies on mind wandering. In the present studies, we report on the development and validation of a visual version of the MRT (the visual metronome response task; vMRT), which uses the rhythmic presentation of visual, rather than auditory, stimuli. Participants completed the vMRT (Studies 1 and 2) and the original (auditory-based) MRT (Study 2) while also responding to intermittent thought probes asking them to report the depth of their mind wandering. The results showed that (1) individual differences in response variability during the vMRT are highly reliable; (2) prior to thought probes, response variability increases with increasing depth of mind wandering; (3) response variability is highly consistent between the vMRT and the original MRT; and (4) both response variability and depth of mind wandering increase with increasing time on task. Our results indicate that the original MRT findings are consistent across the visual and auditory modalities, and that the response variability measured in both tasks indexes a non-modality-specific tendency toward behavioral variability. The vMRT will be useful in the place of the MRT in experimental contexts in which researchers’ designs require a visual-based primary task.

Keywords

Mind wandering Sustained Attention MRT vMRT Metronome Response Task 

Notes

Author note

This research was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant to D.S. (Grant Number 06459), and by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship to P.S.

References

  1. Carriere, J. S., Seli, P., & Smilek, D. (2013). Wandering in both mind and body: Individual differences in mind wandering and inattention predict fidgeting. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031438
  2. Cheyne, J. A., Carriere, J. S., Solman, G. J., & Smilek, D. (2011). Challenge and error: Critical events and attention-related errors. Cognition, 121, 437–446. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.07.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheyne, J. A., Solman, G. J. F., Carriere, J. S. A., & Smilek, D. (2009). Anatomy of an error: A bidirectional state model of task engagement/disengagement and attention-related errors. Cognition, 111, 98–113. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Christoff, K., Gordon, A. M., Smallwood, J., Smith, R., & Schooler, J. W. (2009). Experience sampling during fMRI reveals default network and executive system contributions to mind wandering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 8719–8724. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900234106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feng, S., D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. C. (2013). Mind wandering while reading easy and difficult texts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 586–592. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0367-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Helton, W. S., Kern, R. P., & Walker, D. R. (2009). Conscious thought and the sustained attention to response task. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 600–607. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2009.06.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Jonker, T. R., Seli, P., Cheyne, J. A., & Smilek, D. (2013). Performance reactivity in a continuous-performance task: Implications for understanding post-error behavior. Consciousness and Cognition, 22, 1468–1476. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2013.10.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Magezi, D. A. (2015). Linear mixed-effects models for within-participant psychology experiments: An introductory tutorial and free, graphical user interface (LMMgui). Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00002 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2009). Conducting the train of thought: Working memory capacity, goal neglect, and mind wandering in an executive-control task. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 196–204. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014104 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Mrazek, M. D., Franklin, M. S., Phillips, D. T., Baird, B., & Schooler, J. W. (2013). Mindfulness training improves working memory capacity and GRE performance whereas reducing mind wandering. Psychological Science, 24, 776–781. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612459659 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from www.R-Project.org/
  12. Reichle, E. D., Reineberg, A. E., & Schooler, J. W. (2010). Eye movements during mindless reading. Psychological Science, 21, 1300–1310. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610378686 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Robertson, I. H., Manly, T., Andrade, J., Baddeley, B. T., & Yiend, J. (1997). “Oops!”: Performance correlates of everyday attentional failures in traumatic brain injured and normal subjects. Neuropsychologia, 35, 747–758. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(97)00015-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Seli, P. (2016). The Attention-Lapse and Motor Decoupling accounts of SART performance are not mutually exclusive. Consciousness and Cognition, 41, 189–198. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.02.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Seli, P., Carriere, J. S., Levene, M., & Smilek, D. (2013). How few and far between? Examining the effects of probe rate on self-reported mind wandering. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 430. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00430 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Seli, P., Carriere, J. S. A., Thomson, D. R., Cheyne, J. A., Martens, K. A. E., & Smilek, D. (2014). Restless mind, restless body. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 660–668. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035260 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Seli, P., Cheyne, J. A., Barton, K. R., & Smilek, D. (2012). Consistency of sustained attention across modalities: Comparing visual and auditory versions of the SART. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 44–50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025111
  18. Seli, P., Cheyne, J. A., & Smilek, D. (2012). Attention failures versus misplaced diligence: Separating attention lapses from speed–accuracy trade-offs. Consciousness and Cognition, 21, 277–291. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2011.09.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Seli, P., Cheyne, J. A., & Smilek, D. (2013). Wandering minds and wavering rhythms: Linking mind wandering and behavioral variability. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 39, 1–5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030954 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Seli, P., Cheyne, J. A., Xu, M., Purdon, C., & Smilek, D. (2015). Motivation, intentionality, and mind wandering: Implications for assessments of task-unrelated thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 1417–1425. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000116 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Seli, P., Jonker, T. R., Cheyne, J. A., Cortes, K., & Smilek, D. (2015). Can research participants comment authoritatively on the validity of their self-reports of mind wandering and task engagement? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 703–709. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000029 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Seli, P., Jonker, T. R., Cheyne, J. A., & Smilek, D. (2013). Enhancing SART validity by statistically controlling speed–accuracy trade-offs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 265. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00265 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Seli, P., Jonker, T. R., Solman, G. J. F., Cheyne, J. A., & Smilek, D. (2013). A methodological note on evaluating performance in a sustained-attention-to-response task. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 355–363. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0266-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Smallwood, J., Davies, J. B., Heim, D., Finnigan, F., Sudberry, M., O’Connor, R., & Obonsawin, M. (2004). Subjective experience and the attentional lapse: Task engagement and disengagement during sustained attention. Consciousness and Cognition, 13, 657–690. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2004.06.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2006). The restless mind. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 946–958. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.946 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2015). The science of mind wandering: Empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 487–518. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015331 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Thomson, D. R., Seli, P., Besner, D., & Smilek, D. (2014). On the link between mind wandering and task performance over time. Consciousness and Cognition, 27, 14–26. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2014.04.001Google Scholar
  28. Unsworth, N., & McMillan, B. D. (2013). Mind wandering and reading comprehension: Examining the roles of working memory capacity, interest, motivation, and topic experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 832–842. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029669 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations