The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT Purpose Mind wandering, the shift of attention from a primary task to unrelated thoughts, is a pervasive cognitive phenomenon with significant implications for cognition, emotion, and behavior. Despite its prevalence, accurately measuring mind wandering and its subtypes remains a challenge...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sholeh Nazari, Paul Fitzgerald, Reza Kazemi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-08-01
Series:Brain and Behavior
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.70764
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849228324512989184
author Sholeh Nazari
Paul Fitzgerald
Reza Kazemi
author_facet Sholeh Nazari
Paul Fitzgerald
Reza Kazemi
author_sort Sholeh Nazari
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT Purpose Mind wandering, the shift of attention from a primary task to unrelated thoughts, is a pervasive cognitive phenomenon with significant implications for cognition, emotion, and behavior. Despite its prevalence, accurately measuring mind wandering and its subtypes remains a challenge due to its subjective and dynamic nature. Method This systematic review evaluated the strengths and limitations of methods for measuring mind wandering subtypes, synthesizing findings from 555 studies. Questionnaires and experience sampling methods (ESMs) were most frequently used, offering high ecological validity but limited by self‐report biases. Neuroimaging techniques, such as fMRI and EEG, provided objective insights into neural correlates, particularly the default mode network (DMN), but were constrained by high costs and low ecological validity. Behavioral tasks revealed task‐related attentional lapses but lacked sensitivity to spontaneous mind wandering, while physiological measures and eye‐tracking offered unique perspectives but required complex data analysis. Finding To address the challenges associated with the limitations of existing methodologies for assessing mind wandering, we propose the Multidimensional Assessment of Mind Wandering (MAMW) framework, which integrates diverse methodologies to provide a comprehensive understanding of mind wandering. Conclusion The findings highlight the need for standardized measurement tools, greater ecological validity, and longitudinal research to explore the developmental and clinical trajectories of mind wandering. Future studies should prioritize integrating multiple methods to advance both theoretical knowledge and practical applications in clinical, educational, and workplace settings.
format Article
id doaj-art-c56b9ff393574b10ae7d979ffa7ccde6
institution Kabale University
issn 2162-3279
language English
publishDate 2025-08-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Brain and Behavior
spelling doaj-art-c56b9ff393574b10ae7d979ffa7ccde62025-08-23T04:53:31ZengWileyBrain and Behavior2162-32792025-08-01158n/an/a10.1002/brb3.70764The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic ReviewSholeh Nazari0Paul Fitzgerald1Reza Kazemi2Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences University of Tehran Tehran IranCollege of Health and Medicine The Australian National University Canberra AustraliaFaculty of Entrepreneurship University of Tehran Tehran IranABSTRACT Purpose Mind wandering, the shift of attention from a primary task to unrelated thoughts, is a pervasive cognitive phenomenon with significant implications for cognition, emotion, and behavior. Despite its prevalence, accurately measuring mind wandering and its subtypes remains a challenge due to its subjective and dynamic nature. Method This systematic review evaluated the strengths and limitations of methods for measuring mind wandering subtypes, synthesizing findings from 555 studies. Questionnaires and experience sampling methods (ESMs) were most frequently used, offering high ecological validity but limited by self‐report biases. Neuroimaging techniques, such as fMRI and EEG, provided objective insights into neural correlates, particularly the default mode network (DMN), but were constrained by high costs and low ecological validity. Behavioral tasks revealed task‐related attentional lapses but lacked sensitivity to spontaneous mind wandering, while physiological measures and eye‐tracking offered unique perspectives but required complex data analysis. Finding To address the challenges associated with the limitations of existing methodologies for assessing mind wandering, we propose the Multidimensional Assessment of Mind Wandering (MAMW) framework, which integrates diverse methodologies to provide a comprehensive understanding of mind wandering. Conclusion The findings highlight the need for standardized measurement tools, greater ecological validity, and longitudinal research to explore the developmental and clinical trajectories of mind wandering. Future studies should prioritize integrating multiple methods to advance both theoretical knowledge and practical applications in clinical, educational, and workplace settings.https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.70764attention shiftmeasurement methodsmind wandering
spellingShingle Sholeh Nazari
Paul Fitzgerald
Reza Kazemi
The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review
Brain and Behavior
attention shift
measurement methods
mind wandering
title The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review
title_full The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review
title_short The Relative Accuracy of Different Methods for Measuring Mind Wandering Subtypes: A Systematic Review
title_sort relative accuracy of different methods for measuring mind wandering subtypes a systematic review
topic attention shift
measurement methods
mind wandering
url https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.70764
work_keys_str_mv AT sholehnazari therelativeaccuracyofdifferentmethodsformeasuringmindwanderingsubtypesasystematicreview
AT paulfitzgerald therelativeaccuracyofdifferentmethodsformeasuringmindwanderingsubtypesasystematicreview
AT rezakazemi therelativeaccuracyofdifferentmethodsformeasuringmindwanderingsubtypesasystematicreview
AT sholehnazari relativeaccuracyofdifferentmethodsformeasuringmindwanderingsubtypesasystematicreview
AT paulfitzgerald relativeaccuracyofdifferentmethodsformeasuringmindwanderingsubtypesasystematicreview
AT rezakazemi relativeaccuracyofdifferentmethodsformeasuringmindwanderingsubtypesasystematicreview