Cited by 232Mind wandering and attentionCognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and Memory

The Persistence of Thought: Evidence for a Role of Working Memory in the Maintenance of Task-Unrelated Thinking

Open access
Levinson, Daniel B., Smallwood, Jonathan, Davidson, Richard J.·2012·Psychological Science

Abstract

Tasks that tax working memory (WM) have consistently been found to decrease mind wandering. These findings may indicate that maintenance of mind wandering requires WM resources, such that mind wandering cannot persist when WM resources are being consumed by a task. An alternative explanation for these findings, however, is that mind wandering persists without the support of WM but is nonetheless decreased during any demanding task because good task performance requires that attention be restricted from task-unrelated thought (TUT). The present study tested these two competing theories by investigating whether individuals with greater WM resources mind-wander more during an undemanding task, as would be predicted only by the theory that WM supports TUT. We found that individuals with higher WM capacity reported more TUT in undemanding tasks, which suggests that WM enables the maintenance of mind wandering.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797611431465

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Levinson, D. B., Smallwood, J., & Davidson, R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2012-03-14
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
375-380
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2129021060
Cited by
232
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 7
FWCI
9.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fetzer Institute
  • Association for Psychological Science
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH043454)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (P01AT004952)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P30HD003352)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
mind wandering, working memory, task-unrelated thoughts, task demands, attentional control, cognitive resources
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attention, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Task Performance and Analysis, Thinking

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