The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mind-wandering in younger and older adults: Converging evidence from the sustained attention to response task and reading for comprehension.
Open accessAbstract
One mechanism that has been hypothesized to contribute to older adults' changes in cognitive performance is goal neglect or impairment in maintaining task set across time. Mind-wandering and task-unrelated thought may underlie these potential age-related changes. The present study investigated age-related changes in mind-wandering in three different versions of the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART), along with self-reported mind-wandering during a reading for comprehension task. In the SART, both younger and older adults produced similar levels of faster reaction times before No-Go errors of commission, whereas, older adults produced disproportionate post-error slowing. Subjective self-reports of mind-wandering recorded during the SART and the reading task indicated that older adults were less likely to report mind-wandering than younger adults. Discussion focuses on cognitive and motivational mechanisms that may account for older adults' relatively low levels of reported mind-wandering.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.946 · Cited by 2,067
An automated version of the operation span task
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03192720 · Cited by 1,861
Smallwood, J., Nind, L., & O’Connor, R. C. (2009) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2008.11.004 · Cited by 351
INFORMATION THEORY AND STIMULUS‐INDEPENDENT THOUGHT
ANTROBUS, J. S. (1968) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1968.tb01157.x · Cited by 240
Cited by
The Science of Mind Wandering: Empirically Navigating the Stream of Consciousness
Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2015) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015331 · Cited by 1,685
How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate
Brysbaert, M. (2019) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2019.104047 · Cited by 553
Mind-Wandering With and Without Intention
Seli, P., Risko, E. F., Smilek, D., & Schacter, D. L. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.05.010 · Cited by 451
Mind-wandering, how do I measure thee with probes? Let me count the ways
Weinstein, Y. (2018) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-017-0891-9 · Cited by 250
Default Network Modulation and Large-Scale Network Interactivity in Healthy Young and Old Adults
Spreng, R. N., & Schacter, D. L. (2012) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr339 · Cited by 214
Metadata
- Authors
- Jackson, J. D., & Balota, D. A.
- Venue
- Psychology and Aging
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 106-119
- ISSN
- 0882-7974 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1498
- OpenAlex
- W2028774084
- Cited by
- 236
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 4.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mind-wandering in younger and older adults: Converging evidence from the sustained attention to response task and reading for comprehension. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0023933
- The paper
- Jackson, J. D., & Balota, D. A. (2012). Mind-wandering in younger and older adults: Converging evidence from the sustained attention to response task and reading for comprehension. Psychology and Aging. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023933
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
