Mind wandering during reading: An interdisciplinary and integrative review of psychological, computing, and intervention research and theory

D’Mello, Sidney K.; Mills, Caitlin

doi:10.1111/lnc3.12412

Cited by 29 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 149 publications

(207 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Notably, the strength of the association found in the present study mirrors that found in a previous meta-analysis (i.e., −0.24) conducted to assess the relationship between MW and adults’ performance in a wide set of cognitive tasks other than RC (e.g., interference control, sustained attention, visual search; Randall et al, 2014 ). On the counterpart, it was lower than what was found by D’Mello and Mills ( 2021 ), who merged results from their lab with those on reading reported in Randall et al’s study that resulted in a correlation of r = −.31.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 50%

“…To date, there are no meta-analyses that systematically investigated the strength of the association between MW and RC as well as explored the influence of relevant intervening factors on such a relationship. Recently, D’Mello and Mills ( 2021 ) reported on a mini-meta-analysis combing results from the reading results in Randall et al’s ( 2014 ) study and 25 effects from studies conducted in their lab. They found a weighted mean correlation between MW and RC of −0.31.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The relationship between mind wandering and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mind wandering (MW), a shift of attention away from external tasks toward internally generated thoughts, has been frequently associated with costs in reading comprehension (RC), although with some contrasting results and many reported potential intervening factors. The aim of the meta-analysis was to evaluate the relationship between MW and RC, considering the role of participants’ and text’s characteristics, as well as methodological issues in the measurement of the two constructs. From a set of 25 selected full texts (73 correlation coefficients), pooled correlation (r = −0.21) revealed a negative significant relationship. Using trait-based questionnaires to assess MW compared with online probes resulted in an average significant change of 0.30 in the correlation between MW and RC, leading to a null correlation. A significant effect of age was also found, with more negative correlations with increasing age. None of the other moderating variables considered (i.e., language, text type, text length, RC assessment, text difficulty, text interest, and working memory) resulted in a significant effect. From the present meta-analysis, we might suggest that MW and RC are partially overlapping and vary, within a swing effect, in relation to a set of shared factors, such as working memory, interest, and text length. There might also be side-specific factors that drive the movement of primarily one side of the swing, and future research should further consider the role of individual differences in RC. Implications for research and educational settings are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 50%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between mind wandering and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to , vocal production can provide a boost to memory that helps with rote memorization and facilitates deeper processing. Besides, reading aloud can effectively prevent mind wandering (Varao Sousa et al, 2013), which is common during reading and has a negative association with comprehension (D'Mello & Mills, 2021). For those reasons, one might assume that reading aloud can facilitate incidental collocation learning, which requires empirical research to be conducted.…”

Section: Input Modality and Incidental Collocation Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidental Collocation Learning from Different Modes of Input and Factors That Affect Learning

Vu¹

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collocations, i.e., words that habitually co-occur in texts (e.g., strong coffee, heavy smoker), are ubiquitous in language and thus crucial for second/foreign language (L2) learners to master. However, previous research shows that L2 learners tend to have limited knowledge of collocations and underuse or misuse them. Given the limited classroom time for deliberately teaching all L2 collocations, incidental learning, i.e., learning while being engaged in meaningful input (e.g., listening, reading, viewing), should play an important role in broadening L2 learners’ collocational knowledge. Nonetheless, to date, there are relatively few studies on incidental collocation learning. In addition, little is known about the effects of different modes of input on incidental collocation learning as well as factors that affect learning. Therefore, the current PhD project was conducted to fill those research gaps. To that end, four empirical studies involving Vietnamese learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) were carried out. In each study, participants were exposed to target verb-noun and adjective-noun English collocations in different sets of modes of input (including reading-only, reading-while-listening, reading with textual input enhancement in the form of underlining, reading aloud, and captioned TV viewing) in a counterbalanced fashion. Learning gains in each study were measured with a form recall test on the target collocations administered two times: one week before the treatment (pretest) and one week after the treatment (delayed posttest). Different learner- and item-related factors that might affect learning gains were also examined. Study 1 (Chapter 3) investigated incidental collocation learning from reading-only, reading- while-listening (i.e., reading a book while listening to its audio version), and reading with textual input enhancement (i.e., reading with target items underlined). The results showed that reading with textual input enhancement resulted in significantly more incidental collocation learning than both reading-while-listening and reading-only. Reading-while-listening was more effective for incidental collocation learning than reading-only. Following Study 1, Study 2 (Chapter 4) examined incidental collocation learning from reading-while-listening, reading with textual input enhancement (i.e., underlining), and reading-while-listening plus textual input enhancement to explore if integrating textual input enhancement into reading-while-listening would make a significant difference. The findings revealed that reading with textual input enhancement and reading-while-listening plus textual input enhancement led to significantly more learning gains than reading-while-listening. Reading-while-listening plus textual input enhancement, however, did not differ significantly from reading with textual input enhancement. Study 3 (Chapter 5) looked into incidental collocation learning from reading-while-listening and captioned TV viewing, which differed in terms of the availability of imagery. The results showed that both reading-while-listening and captioned TV led to gains of collocations, but these two modes of input did not differ significantly. Study 4 (Chapter 6) explored incidental collocation learning from reading-only, reading-while-listening, and reading aloud, which were different concerning audio support and vocalization. The results showed that reading aloud and reading-while-listening resulted in significantly more learning gains than reading- only. There was no significant difference between reading aloud and reading-while-listening. With respect to factors that affect learning, all four studies showed that learners’ prior vocabulary knowledge significantly predicted the learning gains (Studies 1, 2, 3, and 4). Learners with more vocabulary knowledge were likely to pick up more collocations from reading. As for captioned TV viewing, Study 3 showed that participants with larger vocabularies picked up fewer collocations than those with smaller vocabularies. About collocational congruency (i.e., the availability of first language equivalents of L2 collocations), Studies 1, 2, and 3 showed that this factor was a significant predictor of learning gains. More congruent collocations were incidentally learned than incongruent collocations. Additionally, only Study 4 found that type of collocation affected learning gains, with more adjective-noun collocations being learned than verb-noun collocations, whereas Studies 1, 2, and 3 did not. Other factors, including frequency of exposure, corpus frequency, strength of association (Studies 1 and 2), and test modality (Study 4) did not affect learning gains. The project contributes to advancing our understanding of the effects of input modality on incidental collocation learning and factors that predict learning gains, which can also help relevant stakeholders make informed decisions about L2 vocabulary learning and teaching.

show abstract

“…The text-driven bottom-up process is as important when measuring the comprehensibility of texts as are the cognitive features, targets and interests of the readers themselves (Schraw and Dennison, 1994;Neiles, 2012;Ho et al, 2014). Readers' linking of information and their own mental structures lead to an in-depth processing of the content, so that the reader is able to construct and re-construct textual and non-textual information (Kintsch and van Dijk, 1978;D'Mello and Mills, 2021).…”

Section: Comprehensibility Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reading textual and non-textual explanations in chemistry texts and textbooks – a review

Meyer

Pietzner

2022

Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Mind wandering during reading: An interdisciplinary and integrative review of psychological, computing, and intervention research and theory

Cited by 29 publications

References 149 publications

The relationship between mind wandering and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis

The relationship between mind wandering and reading comprehension: A meta-analysis

Incidental Collocation Learning from Different Modes of Input and Factors That Affect Learning

Reading textual and non-textual explanations in chemistry texts and textbooks – a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About