You are here:

Text difficulty, topic interest, and mind wandering during reading
ARTICLE

,

Learning and Instruction Volume 61, Number 1, ISSN 0959-4752 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

Abstract

The present article deals with the question of how the difficulty of a text affects a reader's tendency to engage in task-unrelated thinking (mind wandering) during reading, and the potential role of topic interest as a mediator of the relation between text difficulty and mind wandering. Two-hundred and sixteen participants read three texts with each text either being easy, moderate, or difficult in terms of readability and cohesion. From time to time during reading, participants were interrupted and required to indicate whether they were voluntarily or involuntarily engaging in mind wandering. After reading each text, they rated their interest in and familiarity with the topic, and subsequently answered a number of comprehension questions. The results revealed that reading difficult texts increased both voluntary and involuntary mind wandering and this increase partially explained the negative relation between text difficulty and comprehension. Furthermore, topic interest fully mediated the effect of text difficulty on both forms of mind wandering.

Citation

Soemer, A. & Schiefele, U. (2019). Text difficulty, topic interest, and mind wandering during reading. Learning and Instruction, 61(1), 12-22. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved July 6, 2022 from .

This record was imported from Learning and Instruction on March 15, 2019. Learning and Instruction is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.12.006

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ainley, M., Hidi, S.E., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological process that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, pp. 545-561.
  2. Alexander, P.A., Kulikowich, J.M., & Jetton, T.L. (1994). The role of subject-matter knowledge and interest in the processing of linear and nonlinear texts. Review of Educational Research, 64, pp. 201-252.
  3. Björnsson, C.-H. (1968). Läsbarhet. Stockholm: Liber.
  4. Britton, B.K., & Gulgoz, S. (1991). Using Kintsch's computational model to improve instructional text: Effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, pp. 329-345.
  5. Conway, A.R.A., Kane, M.J., Bunting, M.F., Hambrick, D.Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R.W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user's guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, pp. 769-786.
  6. Feng, S., D'Mello, S., & Graesser, A.C. (2013). Mind wandering while reading easy and difficult texts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, pp. 586-592.
  7. Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, pp. 221-233.
  8. Fulmer, S., D'Mello, S., Strain, A., & Graesser, A.C. (2015). Interest-based text preference moderates the effect of text difficulty on engagement and learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 41, pp. 98-110.
  9. Hidi, S.E. (1995). A re-examination of the role of attention in learning from text. Educational Psychological Review, 7, pp. 323-350.
  10. Hidi, S.E. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review, 13, pp. 191-209.
  11. Hidi, S.E. (2006). Interest: A unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review, 1, pp. 69-82.
  12. Hidi, S., Renninger, K.A., & Krapp, A. (2004). Interest, a motivational variable that combines affective and cognitive functioning. Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development, pp. 89-115. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  13. Kane, M.J., & McVay, J.C. (2012). What mind wandering reveals about executive-control abilities and failures. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, pp. 348-354.
  14. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
  15. Landauer, T.K., Foltz, P.W., & Laham, D. (1998). Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, pp. 259-284.
  16. Lenhard, W., Baier, H., Schneider, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2006). conText: Fostering text comprehension by working with texts. Retrieved from http://www.summa.psychologie.uniwuerzburg.de.
  17. Little, T.D., Cunningham, W.A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K.F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, pp. 151-173.
  18. McDaniel, M.A., Waddill, P.J., Finstad, K., & Bourg, T. (2000). The effects of text-based interest on attention and recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, pp. 492-502.
  19. McNamara, D.S., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Learning from text: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes, 22, pp. 247-288.
  20. McVay, J.C., & Kane, M.J. (2012). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, pp. 302-320.
  21. Mills, C., D'Mello, S., & Kopp, K. (2015). The influence of consequence value and text difficulty on affect, attention, and learning while reading instructional texts. Learning and Instruction, 40, pp. 9-20.
  22. Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (n.d.). Mplus [computer software]. Retrieved from https://www.statmodel.com.
  23. Reichle, E.D., Reineberg, A.D., & Schooler, J.W. (2010). An eye-movement study of mindless reading. Psychological Science, 21, pp. 1300-1310.
  24. Renninger, K.A., & Hidi, S.E. (2016). The power of interest for motivation and engagement. New York, London: Routledge.
  25. Rummel, J., & Boywitt, C.D. (2014). Controlling the stream of thought: Working memory capacity predicts adjustment of mind-wandering to situational demands. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, pp. 1309-1315.
  26. Schiefele, U. (1996). Topic interest, text representation, and quality of experience. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, pp. 3-18.
  27. Schiefele, U. (1999). Interest and learning from text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), pp. 257-279.
  28. Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. Handbook of motivation at school, pp. 197-222. New York/London: Routledge.
  29. Schiefele, U., & Krapp, A. (1996). Topic interest and free recall of expository text. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, pp. 141-160.
  30. Schraw, G., Bruning, R., & Svoboda, C. (1995). Sources of situational interest. Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, pp. 1-17.
  31. Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13, pp. 23-52.
  32. Seli, P., Cheyne, J.A., Xu, M., Purdon, C., & Smilek, D. (2015). Motivation, intentionality, and mind wandering: Implications for assessments of task-unrelated thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, pp. 1417-1425.
  33. Seli, P., Risko, E.F., & Smilek, D. (2016). On the necessity of distinguishing between unintentional and intentional mind wandering. Psychological Science, 27, pp. 685-691.
  34. Smallwood, J. (2013). Distinguishing how from why the mind wanders: A process–occurrence framework for self-generated mental activity. Psychological Bulletin, 139, pp. 519-535.
  35. Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J.W. (2015). The science of mind wandering: Empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, pp. 487-518.
  36. Soemer, A., & Schiefele, U. (2017). Can working memory both promote and hinder mind wandering?. Poster presented at the 20th Conference of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology (ESCOP), Potsdam, Germany, pp. 3-6.
  37. Unsworth, N., & McMillan, B.D. (2013). Mind wandering and reading comprehension: Examining the roles of working memory capacity, interest, motivation, and topic experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, pp. 832-842.
  38. Uzzaman, S., & Joordens, S. (2011). The eyes know what you are thinking: Eye movements as an objective measure of mind wandering. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, pp. 1882-1886.
  39. Wade, S.E., Buxton, W.M., & Kelly, M. (1999). Using think-alouds to examine reader-text interest. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, pp. 194-216.
  40. Xu, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2016). Studying in the region of proximal learning reduces mind wandering. Memory & Cognition, 44, pp. 681-695.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References