The Control Failures × Concerns theory perspective proposes that mind-wandering occurs, in part, because of failures to inhibit distracting thoughts from entering consciousness (McVay & Kane, 2012). Despite older adults (OAs) exhibiting poorer inhibition, they report less mind-wandering than do young adults (YAs). Proposed explanations include (a) that OAs' thought reports are less valid due to an unawareness of, or reluctance to report, task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) and (b) that dispositional factors protect OAs from mind-wandering. The primary goal of the current study was to test the validity of thought reports via eye-tracking. A secondary goal was to examine whether OAs' greater mindfulness (Splevins, Smith, & Simpson, 2009) or more positive mood (Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999) protects them from TUTs. We found that eye movement patterns predicted OAs' TUT reports and YAs' task-related interference (TRI, or thoughts about one's performance) reports. Additionally, poor comprehension was associated with more TUTs in both age groups and more TRI in YAs. These results support the validity of OAs' thought reports. Concerning the second aim of the study, OAs' greater tendency to observe their surroundings (a facet of mindfulness) was related to increased TRI, and OAs' more positive mood and greater motivation partially mediated age differences in TUTs. OAs' reduced TUT reports appear to be genuine and potentially related to dispositional factors.

Experience-based cues, such as perceptual fluency, have long been thought to influence metacognitive judgments (Kelley & Jacoby, 1996; Koriat, 1997). Studies found that manipulations of perceptual fluency via changes in font and volume alter Judgments of Learning (JOLs) without influencing memory performance (Rhodes & Castel, 2008, 2009). Nonetheless, recent research (Mueller, Tauber, & Dunlosky, 2013; Mueller, Dunlosky, Tauber, & Rhodes, 2014, 2016) has challenged the notion that experience-based cues such as fluency are the primary basis for item-level JOLs, arguing instead that preexisting beliefs about these manipulations are responsible for these effects. For the first time, we compared global metacognitive judgments to item-level JOLs made during study to independently assess the contribution of beliefs and experience to volume-effects on JOLs. In 3 experiments, we found evidence for strong beliefs about volume-effects on memory, both before and after a study-test phase. However, these beliefs either did not account for the volume effect on JOLs (Experiment 3) or only partially accounted for the volume effect on JOLs (Experiments 1 and 2). Further, in Experiments 2 and 3 global performance estimates (before and after study) did not differ with respect to the volume dose whereas item-level JOLs generally varied with dose strength. Taken together, our findings suggest that both beliefs and experience-based cues contribute independently to the effects of volume on item-level JOLs, but that beliefs alone cannot fully account for the effects of volume on item-level JOLs. (PsycINFO Database Record

Strategy self-reports in the NP task can be considered valid measures of strategy use. However, unnecessary automatic eye movements that appear to influence older adults' NP task performance cannot be identified by strategy reports alone.

Previous studies of metacognitive age differences in skill acquisition strategies have relied exclusively on tasks with a processing shift from an algorithm to retrieval strategy. Older adults’ demonstrated reluctance to shift strategies in such tasks could reflect either a specific aversion to a memory retrieval strategy or a general, inertial resistance to strategy change. Haider and Frensch’s (1999) alphabet verification task (AVT) affords a non-retrieval-based strategy shift. Participants verify the continuation of alphabet strings such as D E F G [4] L, with the bracketed digit indicating a number of letters to be skipped. When all deviations are restricted to the letter-digit-letter portion, participants can speed their responses by selectively attend only to that part of the stimulus. We adapted the AVT to include conditions which promoted shift to a retrieval strategy, a selective attention strategy, or both strategies. Item-level strategy reports were validated by eye movement data. Older adults shifted more slowly to the retrieval strategy but more quickly to the selective attention strategy than young adults, indicating a retrieval-strategy avoidance. Strategy confidence and perceived strategy difficulty correlated with shift to the two strategies in both age groups. Perceived speed of responses with each strategy specifically correlated with older adults’ strategy choices, suggesting that some older adults avoid retrieval because they do not appreciate its efficiency benefits.

Performance on verbal and mathematical tasks is enhanced when participants shift from using algorithms to retrieving information directly from memory (Siegler, 1988a). However, it is unknown whether a shift to retrieval is involved in dynamic spatial skill acquisition. For example, do athletes mentally extrapolate the trajectory of the ball, or do they retrieve the future location from memory? To examine this question, 2 experiments were conducted using a task paradigm similar to the game Pong-a ball was launched from 1 side of the screen and participants attempted to position a paddle to intercept the ball. In Experiment 1, participants responded to a limited number of repeated trajectories. During the learning phase, the response deadline was near the paddle. During the difficult phase, the response deadline was closer to the launch point. During the critical phase, novel trajectories were introduced at the difficult response deadline. If participants are using a retrieval strategy by the critical phase, performance should be significantly worse on the novel trajectories, whereas if they are using an algorithmic strategy, performance on the novel trials should be similar to performance on the repeated trajectories. In Experiment 2, half the participants followed an experimental paradigm similar to Experiment 1 and half experienced all novel trajectories throughout the task. Our results were consistent with a shift from algorithmic processing to retrieval-participants performed significantly better on repeated trajectories relative to novel trajectories. Furthermore, retrieval strategies enhance performance above and beyond what is gained by practicing the algorithm alone. (PsycINFO Database Record