自发走神和有意走神及其与元认知的关系

Spontaneous and Deliberate Mind Wandering: Their Relationship to Metacognition

走神包括有意走神和自发走神两种类型,元认知对二者的影响可能不同。研究使用两维度走神量表和元认知-30量表,对国内部分高校学生的走神和元认知(元认知信念、元认知加工和认知自信判断)进行调查,结果显示:(1)走神可以划分为有意走神和自发走神;(2)失控和危险感既能预测自发走神也能预测有意走神,但认知自信只能预测自发走神,认知的自我意识只能预测有意走神。说明元认知对自发走神和有意走神的影响存在差异。

Recent research has demonstrated that mind wandering can be subdivided into spontaneous and deliberate types. The former involves a spontaneous, involuntary and uncontrollable process, and the latter is often characterized as a deliberate, intentional and controllable process. According to the standard view of interaction between mind wandering and metacognition, metacognition serves to correct the wandering mind, suppressing spontaneous thoughts and bringing attention back to more ＂worthwhile＂ tasks. This view is based on the state level. However, to date, no attempt has been made to evaluate the relationship between metacognition and these subtypes of mind wandering at the trait level. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of metacognition on spontaneous and deliberate mind wandering. A survey was conducted online by a total sample of 183 college students. They completed two questionnaires. One was the Mind Wandering Scale, which consisted of a Deliberate Mind Wandering Scale （MW-D） and a Spontaneous Mind Wandering Scale （MW-S）. The other scale was the Metacognition Questionnaire-30 （MCQ-30）, which was based on the longer original version of the same instrument. The MCQ-30 measured participants＇ beliefs about thinking and thinking processes on five subscales （positive beliefs, uncontTollability and danger, cognitive confidence, needs to control thoughts, and cognitive self-consciousness）. A confirmatory factor analysis was calculated to test the common method variance. Results indicated that the single- factor model was not suitable, confirming the study was accurate enough in terms of common method variance. The results showed （1） The confirmatory factor analysis yielded a two-component solution, indicating that the two factors of mind wandering were best captured by a distinction between spontaneous mind wandering and deliberate and willful mind wandering. （2） Metacognition was positively correlated with MW-D and MW-S. The two factors of metacognition （cognitive confidence, uncontrollability and danger） were both correlated with MW-D and MW-S. （3）A stepwise multiple regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the unique contributions of each metacognition factor to the subtypes of mind wandering. A dissociation between spontaneous and deliberate mind-wander was found. Uncontro!!ability and danger could both predict spontaneous mind wandering and deliberate mind wandering positively, while cognitive confidence was uniquely positively associated with spontaneous mind wandering, and cognitive self-consciousness was uniquely positively associated with deliberate mind wandering. These findings implied that deliberate and spontaneous mind wandering are influenced differently by various dimensions of metacognition, and conflating deliberate and spontaneous mind wandering would result in a misunderstanding of how mind wandering was related to other traits. Extant theories have largely neglected the distinction between spontaneous and deliberate mind wandering, and they must be amended to include the important role of intentionality. People should pay attention to this point in future research. Besides, exploring the association between metacognition and subtypes of mind wandering, researchers should find effective means to make the best use of our mental wandering and help our wandering mind find its way.