Boring Thoughts and Bored Minds: The MAC Model of Boredom and Cognitive Engagement

Westgate, Erin Corwin

doi:10.31219/osf.io/e7ujp

Cited by 48 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 120 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

141

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further evidence for our theoretical view comes from the finding that participants reported increased boredom in the high-demand than in the low-demand condition, which might indicate unsuccessful attentional engagement when people feel either unable or unwilling to engage with ongoing tasks (Westgate & Wilson, 2018). Moreover, participants who reported increased fatigue, demand, or effort also had reduced boundary parameters, but these exploratory effects should be interpreted with caution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Strong Effort Manipulations Reduce Response Caution: A Preregistered Reinvention of the Ego-Depletion Paradigm

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People feel tired or depleted after exerting mental effort. But even preregistered studies often fail to find effects of exerting effort on behavioral performance in the laboratory or elucidate the underlying psychology. We tested a new paradigm in four preregistered within-subjects studies ( N = 686). An initial high-demand task reliably elicited very strong effort phenomenology compared with a low-demand task. Afterward, participants completed a Stroop task. We used drift-diffusion modeling to obtain the boundary (response caution) and drift-rate (information-processing speed) parameters. Bayesian analyses indicated that the high-demand manipulation reduced boundary but not drift rate. Increased effort sensations further predicted reduced boundary. However, our demand manipulation did not affect subsequent inhibition, as assessed with traditional Stroop behavioral measures and additional diffusion-model analyses for conflict tasks. Thus, effort exertion reduced response caution rather than inhibitory control, suggesting that after exerting effort, people disengage and become uninterested in exerting further effort.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Strong Effort Manipulations Reduce Response Caution: A Preregistered Reinvention of the Ego-Depletion Paradigm

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We suggest that thinking for pleasure is a skill that requires both motivation and ability to do well (Westgate & Wilson, 2018). Like any other type of conscious mental activity-such as making a shopping list, trying not to think of a white bear, or evaluating a persuasive communication-people must want to do it and have the requisite cognitive resources to do so (Gilbert, 1991;Petty & Cacioppo, 1986;Wegner, 1994).…”

Section: A Model Of Thinking For Pleasurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We include all data collected and analyzed as of December 1, 2018. Note that a few of the studies were included in a meta analysis reported byWestgate and Wilson (2018).2 The complete data set, SPSS syntax file, variable manual, and Qualtrics files that were used to run many of the studies are available upon request from the first author. Supplemental materials that describe all studies and additional analyses can be found at: https://osf.io/t856x/…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Mind In Its Own Place: The Difficulties and Benefits of Thinking for Pleasure

Wilson¹,

Westgate²,

Buttrick³

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter is concerned with a type of thinking that has received little attention, namely intentional “thinking for pleasure”—the case in which people deliberately focus solely on their thoughts with the goal of generating positive affect. We present a model that describes why it is difficult to enjoy one's thoughts, how it can be done successfully, and when there is value in doing so. We review 36 studies we have conducted on this topic with just over 10,000 participants. We found that thinking for pleasure does not come easily to most people, but can be enjoyable and beneficial under the right conditions. Specifically, we found evidence that thinking for pleasure requires both motivation and the ability to concentrate. For example, several studies show that people enjoy thinking more when it is made easier with the use of “thinking aids.” We present evidence for a trade-off model that holds that people are most likely to enjoy their thoughts if they find those thoughts to be personally meaningful, but that such thinking involves concentration, which lowers enjoyment. Lastly, we review evidence for the benefits of thinking for pleasure, including an intervention study in which participants found thinking for pleasure enjoyable and meaningful in their everyday lives.

show abstract

“…The reason for the existence of so many and such diverse correlates and consequences of boredom might be that boredom is a ‘multi‐motive’ emotion. It causes a search for purposeful engagement alongside a desire for stimulation and challenge (Van Tilburg & Igou, , ; Westgate & Wilson, ), resulting in a potentially rich repertoire of consequences.…”

Section: Boredommentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk‐taking increases under boredom

Kılıç

Tilburg

Igou

2019

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined if boredom is associated with risk‐taking. Although this association has frequently been postulated, it has rarely been tested, and the evidence has thus far been rather indirect and speculative. We conducted three studies to test this association more systematically. In Study 1, people high in boredom proneness reported greater risk‐taking across financial, ethical, recreational, and health or safety domains. In Study 2, over a series of risky decisions, risk‐taking increased in tandem with state boredom. Consistently, in Study 3, people who felt more bored were more likely to choose risky gambles. Furthermore, while dispositional self‐control predicted lower risk‐taking, state boredom nullified this association, suggesting that elevated risk‐taking might be attributed the erosion of self‐control under boredom. Our findings establish via direct empirical tests that boredom is associated with making riskier decisions.

show abstract

Boring Thoughts and Bored Minds: The MAC Model of Boredom and Cognitive Engagement

Cited by 48 publications

References 120 publications

Strong Effort Manipulations Reduce Response Caution: A Preregistered Reinvention of the Ego-Depletion Paradigm

Strong Effort Manipulations Reduce Response Caution: A Preregistered Reinvention of the Ego-Depletion Paradigm

The Mind In Its Own Place: The Difficulties and Benefits of Thinking for Pleasure

Risk‐taking increases under boredom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About