Mind-wandering and boredom are common phenomena, characterized by shifts in attention and difficulties in sustaining focus. Despite extensive research on the costs and benefits of these states, our understanding of the relationship between mind-wandering, boredom, attention, and memory remains limited. In the current study, we examined the impact that mind-wandering and boredom during encoding have on recognition. In particular, we investigated what impact mind-wandering and boredom have during the encoding of visual stimuli on the pupil old/new effect during recognition. We used an incidental memory task and measured mind-wandering and boredom with thought probes during encoding. Furthermore, we used the pupil old/new effect, assessed via eye-tracking, as a measure of recognition memory. We found a significant effect of boredom on recognition memory and observed the pupil old/new effect in participants regardless of instances of mind-wandering or boredom during encoding. Our findings point toward different mechanisms that underlie mind-wandering and boredom’s obstruction of attention during stimuli encoding and their effects on stimuli processing. In addition, these findings reinforce the idea of the pupil old/new effect as a reliable measure of recognition memory as it remained consistent irrespective of attentional lapses due to mind-wandering and boredom.
AlyM.Turk-BrowneN. B. (2017). How Hippocampal Memory Shapes, and Is Shaped by, Attention. In: HannulaD.DuffM. (Eds.), The Hippocampus from Cells to Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50406-3_12
2.
BaayenR. H.DavidsonD. J.BatesD. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4),390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
3.
BaddeleyA. (2001). The concept of episodic memory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 356(1413),1345–1350. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2001.0957
4.
BairdB.SmallwoodJ.MrazekM. D.KamJ. W. Y.FranklinM. S.SchoolerJ. W. (2012). Inspired by distraction: Mind wandering facilitates creative incubation. Psychological Science, 23(10),1117–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612446024
5.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01
6.
BarthelméS.TschumperléD. (2019). imager: an R package for image processing based on CImg. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(38), 1012. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01012
7.
BeattyJ. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91(2),276–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.2.276
BlanchardN.BixlerR.JoyceT.D’MelloS. (2014). Automated physiological-based detection of mind wandering during learning. In Trausan-MatuS.BoyerK. E.CrosbyM.PanourgiaK. (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (Vol. 8474, pp. 55–60). Springer International Publishing, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07221-0_7
10.
BlondéP.GirardeauJ. C.SperdutiM.PiolinoP. (2022a). A wandering mind is a forgetful mind: A systematic review on the influence of mind wandering on episodic memory encoding. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 132, 774–792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.11.015
11.
BlondéP.SperdutiM.MakowskiD.PiolinoP. (2022b). Bored, distracted, and forgetful: The impact of mind wandering and boredom on memory encoding. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(1),53–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218211026301
12.
BradleyM. M.LangP. J. (2015). Memory, emotion, and pupil diameter: Repetition of natural scenes. Psychophysiology, 52(9),1186–1193. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12442
13.
BrocherA.GrafT. (2016). Pupil old/new effects reflect stimulus encoding and decoding in short-term memory. Psychophysiology, 53(12),1823–1835. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12770
14.
BrosowskyN. P.MurrayS.SchoolerJ.SeliP. (2021). Attention need not always apply: Mind wandering impedes explicit but not implicit sequence learning. Cognition, 209, 104530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104530
15.
Campos-ArteagaG.ForcatoC.WainsteinG.LagosR.Palacios-GarcíaI.ArtigasC.MoralesR.PedreiraM. E.RodríguezE. (2020). Differential neurophysiological correlates of retrieval of consolidated and reconsolidated memories in humans: An ERP and pupillometry study. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 174, 107279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2020.107279
16.
CarriereJ. S. A.CheyneJ. A.SmilekD. (2008). Everyday attention lapses and memory failures: The affective consequences of mindlessness. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(3),835–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2007.04.008
17.
ChristoffK.GordonA. M.SmallwoodJ.SmithR.SchoolerJ. W. (2009). Experience sampling during fMRI reveals default network and executive system contributions to mind wandering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(21),8719–8724. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900234106
18.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). L. Erlbaum Associates.
19.
DanckertJ.HammerschmidtT.Marty-DugasJ.SmilekD. (2018). Boredom: Under-aroused and restless. Consciousness and Cognition, 61, 24–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2018.03.014
20.
DoraJ.Van HooffM.GeurtsS.KompierM.BijleveldE. (2021). Fatigue, boredom and objectively measured smartphone use at work. Royal Society Open Science, 8(7), 201915. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201915
21.
DzulkifliM. A.MustafarM. F. (2013). The influence of colour on memory performance: A review. The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, 20(2), 3–9.
22.
EastwoodJ. D.FrischenA.FenskeM. J.SmilekD. (2012). The unengaged mind: defining boredom in terms of attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 482–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612456044
23.
EinhäuserW.StoutJ.KochC.CarterO. (2008). Pupil dilation reflects perceptual selection and predicts subsequent stability in perceptual rivalry. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(5),1704–1709. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707727105
24.
EllisC. J. (1981). The pupillary light reflex in normal subjects. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 65(11),754–759. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.65.11.754
25.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2),175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
26.
FengS.D’MelloS.GraesserA. C. (2013). Mind wandering while reading easy and difficult texts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(3),586–592. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0367-y
27.
FranklinM. S.MrazekM. D.AndersonC. L.SmallwoodJ.KingstoneA.SchoolerJ. W. (2013). The silver lining of a mind in the clouds: Interesting musings are associated with positive mood while mind-wandering. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 583. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00583
28.
GavasR.ChatterjeeD.SinhaA. (2017). Estimation of cognitive load based on the pupil size dilation. 2017 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics (SMC), Banff, AB, Canada, pp. 1499–1504. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2017.8122826
29.
GeanaA.WilsonR.DawN.CohenJ. D. (2016). Boredom, information-seeking and exploration. In PapafragouA.MirmanD.GrodnerD.TrueswellJ. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 1, pp. 1751–1756). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
GrootJ. M.BoayueN. M.CsifcsákG.BoekelW.HusterR.ForstmannB. U.MittnerM. (2021). Probing the neural signature of mind wandering with simultaneous fMRI-EEG and pupillometry. NeuroImage, 224, 117412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117412
32.
HeaverB.HuttonS. B. (2011). Keeping an eye on the truth? Pupil size changes associated with recognition memory. Memory, 19(4),398–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2011.575788
HuttS.KrasichK.MillsC.BoschN.WhiteS.BrockmoleJ. R.D’MelloS. K. (2019). Automated gaze-based mind wandering detection during computerized learning in classrooms. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 29(4), 821–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-019-09228-5
37.
IsacescuJ.StrukA. A.DanckertJ. (2017). Cognitive and affective predictors of boredom proneness. Cognition and Emotion, 31(8), 1741–1748. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1259995
38.
JaintaS.BaccinoT. (2010). Analyzing the pupil response due to increased cognitive demand: An independent component analysis study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 77(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2010.03.008
39.
KafkasA.MontaldiD. (2011). Recognition memory strength is predicted by pupillary responses at encoding while fixation patterns distinguish recollection from familiarity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(10), 1971–1989. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.588335
40.
KafkasA.MontaldiD. (2015). The pupillary response discriminates between subjective and objective familiarity and novelty. Psychophysiology, 52(10), 1305–1316. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12471
KamJ. W. Y.HandyT. C. (2018). Electrophysiological evidence for attentional decoupling during mind-wandering. In: ChristoffK.FoxK. C. R. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of spontaneous thought: Mind-wandering, creativity, and dreaming (Vol. 1, pp. 249–258). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190464745.013.13
44.
KaneM. J.SmeekensB. A.MeierM. E.WelhafM. S.PhillipsN. E. (2021). Testing the construct validity of competing measurement approaches to probed mind-wandering reports. Behavior Research Methods, 53(6), 2372–2411. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01557-x
45.
KatoY.EndoH.KizukaT. (2009). Mental fatigue and impaired response processes: Event-related brain potentials in a Go/NoGo task. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 72(2), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.12.00
KonishiM.SmallwoodJ. (2016). Shadowing the wandering mind: How understanding the mind-wandering state can inform our appreciation of conscious experience. WIREs cognitive science, 7(4), 233–246. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1392
49.
KucewiczM. T.DolezalJ.KremenV.BerryB. M.MillerL. R.MageeA. L.FabianV.WorrellG. A. (2018). Pupil size reflects successful encoding and recall of memory in humans. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 4949. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23197-6
50.
LaptevaA.MartarelliC. S. (2024). Pupil old/new effect as an objective measure of recognition memory: a meta-analysis of 17 eye-tracking experiments. Memory, 32(9), 1211–1226. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2024.2395367
51.
LuJ. G.AkinolaM.MasonM. F. (2017). “Switching On” creativity: Task switching can increase creativity by reducing cognitive fixation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 139, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.01.005
52.
MailletD.SchacterD. L. (2016). When the mind wanders: Distinguishing stimulus-dependent from stimulus-independent thoughts during incidental encoding in young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 31(4), 370–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000099
53.
MailletD.SeliP.SchacterD. L. (2017). Mind-wandering and task stimuli: Stimus dependent thoughts influence performance on memory tasks and are more often past-versus future-oriented. Consciousness and Cognition, 52, 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.04.014
MartarelliC. S.BertramsA.WolffW. (2021). A personality trait-based network of boredom, spontaneous and deliberate mind-wandering. Assessment, 28(8), 1915–1931. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120936336
56.
MartarelliC. S.Ovalle-FresaR. (2023). In sight, out of mind? Disengagement at encoding gradually reduces recall of location. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231159656
57.
McVayJ. C.KaneM. 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(1), 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014104
58.
McVayJ. C.KaneM. J. (2010). Adrift in the Stream of Thought: The effects of mind wandering on executive control and working memory capacity. In GruszkaA.MatthewsG.SzymuraB. (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition (pp. 321–334). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1210-7_19
59.
McVayJ. C.KaneM. J. (2012a). Drifting from slow to “D’oh!” working memory capacity and mind wandering predict extreme reaction times and executive-control errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(3), 525–549. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025896
60.
McVayJ. C.KaneM. J. (2012b). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 141(2),302–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025250
61.
MittnerM.HawkinsG. E.BoekelW.ForstmannB. U. (2016). A neural model of mind wandering. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(8), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.004
62.
MontefineseM.AmbrosiniE.FairfieldB.MammarellaN. (2013). The “subjective” pupil old/new effect: Is the truth plain to see?International Journal of Psychophysiology, 89(1), 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.05.001
63.
MooneyhamB. W.SchoolerJ. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031569
NaberM.FrässleS.RutishauserU.EinhäuserW. (2013). Pupil size signals novelty and predicts later retrieval success for declarative memories of natural scenes. Journal of Vision, 13(2), 11. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.2.11
66.
NassarM. R.RumseyK. M.WilsonR. C.ParikhK.HeaslyB.GoldJ. I. (2012). Rational regulation of learning dynamics by pupil-linked arousal systems. Nature Neuroscience, 15(7), 1040–1046. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3130
67.
OlivaM. (2019). Pupil size and search performance in low and high perceptual load. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 19(2), 366–376. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-018-00677-w
68.
OliveiraJ.FernandesM.RosaP. J.GamitoP. (2021). Is pupil activity associated with the strength of memory signal for words in a continuous recognition memory paradigm?Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 686183. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.686183
PapeshM. H.GoldingerS. D.HoutM. C. (2012). Memory strength and specificity revealed by pupillometry. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 83(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.10.002
71.
PhamP.WangJ. (2015). Attentive learner: Improving mobile MOOC learning via implicit heart rate tracking. In ConatiC.HeffernanN.MitrovicA.VerdejoM. F. (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education (Vol. 9112, pp. 367–376). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19773-9_37
72.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
73.
RantiC.JonesW.KlinA.ShultzS. (2020). Blink rate patterns provide a reliable measure of individual engagement with scene content. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 8267. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64999-x
74.
ReichleE. D.ReinebergA. E.SchoolerJ. W. (2010). Eye movements during mindless reading. Psychological Science, 21(9), 1300–1310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610378686
75.
RobinsonM. D.JohnsonJ. T.HerndonF. (1997). Reaction time and assessments of cognitive effort as predictors of eyewitness memory accuracy and confidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 416–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.3.416
76.
RibyL. M.SmallwoodJ.GunnV. P. (2008). Mind wandering and retrieval from episodic memory: A pilot event-related potential study. Psychological Reports, 102(3), 805–818. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.102.3.805-818
77.
RingM.BowlerD. M.GaiggS. B. (2020). A physiological marker of recognition memory in adults with autism spectrum disorder? The pupil old/new effect. Autism Research, 13(4), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2251
78.
RubyF. J. M.SmallwoodJ.EngenH.SingerT. (2013). How self-generated thought shapes mood—the relation between mind-wandering and mood depends on the socio-temporal content of thoughts. PLoS One, 8(10), e77554. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077554
79.
SchadD. J.NuthmannA.EngbertR. (2012). Your mind wanders weakly, your mind wanders deeply: Objective measures reveal mindless reading at different levels. Cognition, 125(2), 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.004
80.
SchoolerJ. W.ReichleE. D.HalpernD. V. (2004). Zoning out while reading: Evidence for dissociations between experience and metaconsciousness. In LevinD. T. (Ed.), Thinking and seeing: Visual metacognition in adults and children (pp. 203–226). MIT Press.
81.
SchoolerJ. W.SmallwoodJ.ChristoffK.HandyT. C.ReichleE. D.SayetteM. A. (2011). Meta-awareness, perceptual decoupling and the wandering mind. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 319–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.006
82.
SeibertP. S.EllisH. C. (1991). Irrelevant thoughts, emotional mood states, and cognitive task performance. Memory & Cognition, 19(5), 507–513. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199574
83.
SeliP.CarriereJ. S. A.LeveneM.SmilekD. (2013). How few and far between? Examining the effects of probe rate on self-reported mind wandering. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 430. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00430
84.
SmallwoodJ.BeachE.SchoolerJ. W.HandyT. C. (2008). Going AWOL in the Brain: mind wandering reduces cortical analysis of external events. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(3), 458–469. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20037
85.
SmallwoodJ.BrownK. S.TipperC.GiesbrechtB.FranklinM. S.MrazekM. D.CarlsonJ. M.SchoolerJ. W. (2011). Pupillometric evidence for the decoupling of attention from perceptual input during offline thought. PLoS One, 6(3), e18298. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018298
86.
SmallwoodJ.O’ConnorR. C.SudberryM. V.HaskellC.BallantyneC. (2004). The consequences of encoding information on the maintenance of internally generated images and thoughts: The role of meaning complexes. Consciousness and Cognition, 13(4), 789–820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2004.07.004
SmilekD.CarriereJ. S. A.CheyneJ. A. (2010). Out of mind, out of sight: Eye blinking as indicator and embodiment of mind wandering. Psychological Science, 21(6), 786–789. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610368063
89.
StanislawH.TodorovN. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(1), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207704
90.
StawarczykD.FrançoisC.WertzJ.D’ArgembeauA. (2020). Drowsiness or mind-wandering? Fluctuations in ocular parameters during attentional lapses. Biological Psychology, 156, 107950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2020.107950
91.
StawarczykD.MajerusS.MajM.Van Der LindenM.D’ArgembeauA. (2011). Mind-wandering: Phenomenology and function as assessed with a novel experience sampling method. Acta Psychologica, 136(3), 370–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.01.002
92.
SteinbergerF.MoellerA.SchroeterR. (2016). The antecedents, experience, and coping strategies of driver boredom in young adult males. Journal of Safety Research, 59, 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2016.10.007
93.
SternJ. A.BoyerD.SchroederD. (1994). Blink Rate: A possible measure of fatigue. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 36(2), 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208940360020
94.
ThomsonD. R.SmilekD.BesnerD. (2014). On the asymmetric effects of mind-wandering on levels of processing at encoding and retrieval. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 728–733. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0526-9
UnsworthN.McMillanB. 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(3), 832–842. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029669
97.
VingerhoetsG.VermeuleE.SantensP. (2005). Impaired intentional content learning but spared incidental retention of contextual information in non-demented patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia, 43(5), 675–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.09.003
98.
VõM. L. H.JacobsA. M.KuchinkeL.HofmannM.ConradM.SchachtA.HutzlerF. (2008). The coupling of emotion and cognition in the eye: Introducing the pupil old/new effect. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00606.x
99.
WeinsteinY. (2018). Mind-wandering, how do I measure thee with probes? Let me count the ways. Behavior Research Methods, 50(2), 642–661. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0891-9
100.
WeissmanD. H.RobertsK. C.VisscherK. M.WoldorffM. G. (2006). The neural bases of momentary lapses in attention. Nature Neuroscience, 9(7), 971–978. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1727
101.
WolffW.RadtkeV. C.MartarelliC. (2024). Same same but different – What is Boredom Actually? In BielekeM.WolffW.MartarelliC. S. (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Boredom (pp. 5–29). Routledge.
102.
ZhangH.AndersonN. C.MillerK. F. (2021). Refixation patterns of mind-wandering during real-world scene perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 47(1),36–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000877
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
