Literature DB >> 35233698

Does framing an assignment as involving one or multiple components influence subjective experiences of attentional engagement?

Emilie E Caron1, Allison C Drody2, Brandon C W Ralph1, Jonathan S A Carriere3, Daniel Smilek1.   

Abstract

Across two studies, we explored whether framing an assignment as involving either multitasking or single-tasking (Srna et al. Psychol Sci 29(12):1942-1955, 2018) leads to differences in both subjective ratings of attentional engagement (i.e., depth of concentration and attentional control) and performance during the assignment. In Experiment 1, we manipulated task framing in the context of an assignment in which participants (Ncollected = 238) simultaneously completed a word-search and an anagram task (Srna et al. Psychol Sci 29(12):1942-1955, 2018). While we replicated prior findings that participants who receive multitasking instructions perform better than those who receive single-tasking instructions, we did not find any influence of task framing on participants' subjective evaluations of their attentional engagement. Exploratory analyses, however, revealed that regardless of group assignment, those who believed they were multitasking reported greater levels of attentional engagement than those who believed they were single-tasking. In Experiment 2 (Ncollected = 238), task framing was varied in the context of the 2-back task (Kirchner J Exp Psychol 55(4): 352, 1958). Unexpectedly, we found that, relative to participants who received single-tasking instructions, those who received multitasking instructions reported exerting less attentional control over their thoughts and showed a greater number of incorrect responses to non-target trials on the 2-back. Taken together, the results do not support a straightforward conclusion regarding the influence of task framing on either subjective reports of attentional engagement or task performance. Nevertheless, they provide insight into our understanding of the role of task framing in contexts ranging from commonly performed real-world tasks to typical laboratory tasks.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 35233698     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-022-01651-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  12 in total

1.  Age differences in short-term retention of rapidly changing information.

Authors:  W K KIRCHNER
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1958-04

Review 2.  The restless mind.

Authors:  Jonathan Smallwood; Jonathan W Schooler
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  The lights are on but no one's home: meta-awareness and the decoupling of attention when the mind wanders.

Authors:  Jonathan Smallwood; Merrill McSpadden; Jonathan W Schooler
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-06

4.  On the optimality of serial and parallel processing in the psychological refractory period paradigm: effects of the distribution of stimulus onset asynchronies.

Authors:  Jeff Miller; Rolf Ulrich; Bettina Rolke
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  When the brain takes a break: a model-based analysis of mind wandering.

Authors:  Matthias Mittner; Wouter Boekel; Adrienne M Tucker; Brandon M Turner; Andrew Heathcote; Birte U Forstmann
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  The role of task difficulty in theoretical accounts of mind wandering.

Authors:  Paul Seli; Mahiko Konishi; Evan F Risko; Daniel Smilek
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2018-09-13

7.  Stimulus-independent thought depends on central executive resources.

Authors:  J D Teasdale; B H Dritschel; M J Taylor; L Proctor; C A Lloyd; I Nimmo-Smith; A D Baddeley
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1995-09

8.  Aging ebbs the flow of thought: adult age differences in mind wandering, executive control, and self-evaluation.

Authors:  Jennifer C McVay; Matthew E Meier; Dayna R Touron; Michael J Kane
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2012-12-20

9.  Volitional media multitasking: awareness of performance costs and modulation of media multitasking as a function of task demand.

Authors:  Brandon C W Ralph; Paul Seli; Kristin E Wilson; Daniel Smilek
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2018-07-17

10.  Oculometric variations during mind wandering.

Authors:  Romain Grandchamp; Claire Braboszcz; Arnaud Delorme
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-02-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.