Physiological limitations on the visual system require gaze to move from location to location to extract the most relevant information within a scene. Therefore, gaze provides a real-time index of the information-processing priorities of the visual system. We investigated gaze allocation during mind wandering (MW), a state where cognitive priorities shift from processing task-relevant external stimuli (i.e., the visual world) to task-irrelevant internal thoughts. In both a main study and a replication, we recorded the eye movements of college-aged adults who studied images of urban scenes and responded to pseudorandom thought probes on whether they were mind wandering or attentively viewing at the time of the probe. Probe-caught MW was associated with fewer and longer fixations, greater fixation dispersion, and more frequent eyeblinks (only observed in the main study) relative to periods of attentive scene viewing. These findings demonstrate that gaze indices typically considered to represent greater engagement with scene processing (e.g., longer fixations) can also indicate MW. In this way, the current work exhibits a need for empirical investigations and computational models of gaze control to account for MW for a more accurate representation of the moment-to-moment information-processing priorities of the visual system. (PsycINFO Database Record

We investigate the use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) eye-trackers to automatically detect mind wandering -a phenomenon involving a shift in attention from task-related to task-unrelated thoughts -during computerized learning. Study 1 (N = 135 high-school students) tested the feasibility of COTS eye tracking while students learn biology with an intelligent tutoring system (ITS) called GuruTutor in their classroom. We could successfully track eye gaze in 75% (both eyes tracked) and 95% (one eye tracked) of the cases for 85% of the sessions where gaze was successfully recorded. In Study 2, we used this data to build automated student-independent detectors of mind wandering, obtaining accuracies (mind wandering F1 = 0.59) substantially better than chance (F1 = 0.24). Study 3 investigated context-generalizability of mind wandering detectors, finding that models trained on data collected in a controlled laboratory more successfully generalized to the classroom than the reverse. Study 4 investigated gaze-and video-based mind wandering detection, finding that gaze-based detection was superior and multimodal detection yielded an improvement in limited circumstances. We tested live mind wandering detection on a new sample of 39 students in Study 5 and found that detection accuracy (mind wandering F1 = 0.40) was considerably above chance (F1 = 0.24), albeit lower than offline detection accuracy from Study 1 (F1 = 0.59), a finding attributable to handling of missing data. We discuss our next steps towards developing gaze-based attention-aware learning technologies to increase engagement and learning by combating mind wandering in classroom contexts.

During mind wandering, visual processing of external information is attenuated. Accordingly, mind wandering is associated with changes in gaze behaviors, albeit findings are inconsistent in the literature. This heterogeneity obfuscates a complete view of the moment-to-moment processing priorities of the visual system during mind wandering. We hypothesize that this observed heterogeneity is an effect of idiosyncrasy across tasks with varying spatial allocation demands, visual processing demands, and discourse processing demands and reflects a strategic, compensatory shift in how the visual system operates during mind wandering. We recorded eye movements and mind wandering (via thought-probes) as 132 college-aged adults completed a battery of 7 short (6 min) tasks with different visual demands. We found that for tasks requiring extensive sampling of the visual field, there were fewer fixations, and, depending on the specific task, fixations were longer and/or more dispersed. This suggests that visual sampling is sparser and potentially slower and more dispersed to compensate for the decreased sampling rate during mind wandering. For tasks that demand centrally focused gaze, mind wandering was accompanied by more exploratory eye movements, such as shorter and more dispersed fixations as well as larger saccades. Gaze behaviors were not reliably associated with mind wandering during a film comprehension task. These findings provide insight into how the visual system prioritizes external information when attention is focused inward and indicates the importance of task demands when assessing the relationship between eye movements, visual processing, and mind wandering.

In recent years, the number of studies examining mind wandering has increased considerably, and research on the topic has spread widely across various domains of psychological research. Athough the term mind wandering has been used to refer to various cognitive states, researchers typically operationalize mind wandering in terms of task-unrelated thought (TUT). Research on TUT has shed light on the various task features that require people’s attention and on the consequences of task inattention. Important methodological and conceptual complications do persist, however, in current investigations of TUT. We argue that these complications may be dampening the development of a more nuanced scientific account of TUT. In this article, we outline three of the more prominent methodological and conceptual complications in the literature on TUT and discuss potential directions for researchers to take as they move forward in their investigations of TUT.