Elsevier

Consciousness and Cognition

Volume 41, April 2016, Pages 104-118
Consciousness and Cognition

Temporal focus, temporal distance, and mind-wandering valence: Results from an experience sampling and an experimental study

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.02.004Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We studied the relation between temporal focus and distance, and thought valence.

  • An experience sampling study in daily life and a lab experiment were carried out.

  • Future-oriented thoughts were more positive in both studies.

  • Thoughts about the distant (vs. near) past/future were more positive in the lab.

Abstract

When mind-wandering, people may think about events that happened in the past, or events that may happen in the future. Using experience sampling, we first aimed to replicate the finding that future-oriented thoughts show a greater positivity bias than past-oriented thoughts. Furthermore, we investigated whether there is a relation between the temporal distance of past- and future-oriented thoughts and the frequency of positive thoughts, a factor that has received little attention in previous work. Second, we experimentally investigated the relation between temporal focus, temporal distance, and thought valence. Both studies showed that future-oriented thoughts were more positive compared to past-oriented thoughts. Regarding temporal distance, thoughts about the distant past and future were more positive than thoughts about the near past and future in the experiment. However, the experience sampling study did not provide clear insight into this relation. Potential theoretical and methodological explanations for these findings are discussed.

Introduction

We tend to think about something else than the activity we are currently engaged in on a regular basis. Our mind may wander off to our plans for the weekend while reading a long method section, or thoughts about an incident at work may pop up into our mind while watching a movie. Schooler et al. (2014) define mind-wandering as “a common everyday experience in which attention becomes disengaged from the immediate external environment and focused on internal trains of thought” (p. 1). According to estimates based on experience sampling and lab studies, people spend 25–50 percent of their time mind-wandering (Schooler et al., 2014).

When people engage in mind-wandering, the temporal focus and temporal distance of their thoughts may vary: Thoughts may wander off to events that happened in the near or distant past, or to events that may happen in the near or distant future. Previous research showed that mind-wandering is more frequently directed toward the future than toward the past, and more frequently directed toward the near past and future than toward the distant past and future (Stawarczyk et al., 2013, Stawarczyk et al., 2011). As such, it has been proposed that mind-wandering plays an important role in autobiographical planning and problem-solving (e.g. Baird et al., 2011, Mooneyham and Schooler, 2013, Ruby et al., 2013, Smallwood et al., 2009). Furthermore, mind-wandering may entail negative, neutral, or positive thoughts. While people’s minds wander more often to pleasant topics than to neutral or negative ones in general (e.g. Killingsworth & Gilbert, 2010), research in the mental time travel literature suggests that this positivity bias is greater for future-oriented thoughts than for past-oriented thoughts (e.g. Andrews-Hanna et al., 2013, Berntsen and Jacobsen, 2008, Finnbogadóttir and Berntsen, 2013, Newby-Clark and Ross, 2003).

Whereas previous studies have investigated the relation between temporal focus and thought valence, it is unclear whether temporal distance affects the valence of one’s thoughts. Thoughts about the near past and future may be mostly concerned with relatively concrete daily hassles and joys (e.g. a flat tire or a dinner with friends), whereas thoughts about the distant past and future may largely be concerned with relatively abstract events (e.g. obtaining tenure or getting married). This difference in abstraction level may in turn influence the frequency of negative and positive thoughts.

In the next section, we review earlier studies on the relation between temporal focus and thought valence. While previous studies provide valuable insight into this relation, some methodological limitations of these studies were identified. Therefore, we propose a potentially more optimal method for investigating the relation between temporal focus and mind-wandering valence in people’s daily lives: experience sampling. Following this, we discuss how temporal distance may influence the valence of one’s thoughts. Temporal focus and temporal distance have not been investigated simultaneously in relation to the frequency of negative and positive thoughts before.

To the best of our knowledge, the relation between temporal focus and the valence of thoughts has received only limited attention in the mind-wandering literature. One lab study showed that thoughts with no particular future- or goal-oriented function, such as daydreaming or boosting positive emotions, were more positive than thoughts that did have a clear future- or goal-oriented function, such as problem solving or planning (both thought types could have a past or a future orientation; Stawarczyk et al., 2013). However, this study did not reveal a significant difference in affective valence between future-oriented mind-wandering and either non-future-oriented mind-wandering in general or past-oriented mind-wandering specifically (see footnote 1 in Stawarczyk et al., 2013). Furthermore, one experience sampling study examined characteristics of mind-wandering in Chinese daily lives and included measures of both temporal focus and emotional valence (Song & Wang, 2012). However, no results were reported regarding the relation between temporal focus and emotional valence.

Related to the present research, past-focused mind-wandering has been linked to prior sad mood (Poerio et al., 2013, Smallwood and O’Connor, 2011; see also Stawarczyk, Majerus, & D’Argembeau, 2013). Past-other-oriented mind-wandering has also been related to subsequent negative mood, even when one’s current thought was positive, while future-self-oriented mind-wandering has been related to subsequent positive mood, even when one’s current thought was negative (Ruby, Smallwood, Engen, & Singer, 2013). Another study found a marginally significant relation between prior feelings of anxiety and future-oriented mind-wandering (Poerio et al., 2013). Taken together, these studies seem to suggest an association between mind-wandering about the past and negative affect, and an association between mind-wandering about the future and positive affect, as well as anxiety. However, these studies did not directly investigate the relation between temporal focus and mind-wandering valence, but investigated the relation between temporal focus and prior/subsequent mood. Importantly, mind-wandering valence and subsequent mood seemed to be partly independent, depending on the socio-temporal content of the wandering mind.

Several studies in the mental time travel literature have investigated the relation between temporal focus and thought valence specifically. Mental time travel involves reliving events in one’s past and preliving possible events in one’s future through autobiographical memories and future projections (Finnbogadóttir and Berntsen, 2013, Tulving, 2002). Although mind-wandering and mental time travel are not the same, especially the literature on involuntary (as opposed to voluntary) mental time travel may provide insight in the relation between temporal focus and mind-wandering valence. Namely, involuntary autobiographical memories and future projections may be seen as instances of the broader category of mind-wandering (Johannessen and Berntsen, 2010, Plimpton et al., 2015). In fact, the instructions used in mind-wandering research and involuntary mental time travel research are often rather similar. As such, Plimpton et al. (2015) have recently proposed to bridge these ‘related but separate’ (p. 261) areas of research.

In a diary study by Finnbogadóttir and Berntsen (2013) participants were asked to record the valence of involuntary autobiographical memories on a single day. On another day, participants did the same for autobiographical future projections. While the frequency of positive thoughts was higher than the frequency of negative thoughts for both memories and future projections, the positivity bias was greater for the future. Furthermore, Andrews-Hanna et al. (2013) asked participants to report 36 thoughts that had been on their minds recently, and to rate these thoughts on several dimensions, including valence. Future-oriented thoughts were on average more positive than past-oriented thoughts. In a diary study by Berntsen and Jacobsen (2008), participants were asked to reflect on two involuntary and two voluntary representations about past events on some days, and two involuntary and two voluntary representations about future events on other days. They found a positivity bias for the future for both voluntary and involuntary thoughts. Finally, in a lab experiment by Newby-Clark and Ross (2003), participants reported up to ten significant past as well as future events, and subsequently rated how they felt or would feel during these events. The average positive affect (which is likely to be related to thought valence) was higher for future than for past events. As such, results of naturalistic and experimental studies, as well as results for voluntary and involuntary mental time travel, seem to converge.

The positivity bias for future-oriented thoughts may be explained by the fact that thoughts about the past are constrained by reality, while thoughts about the future are less so. Despite people’s general positivity bias, specific negative events that happened in one’s past tend to be remembered well (Cacioppo & Gardner, 1999), and this may attenuate the positivity bias for the past. However, we cannot know what will happen in the future, and hence, this attenuation seems to be smaller or absent for thoughts about the future (Finnbogadóttir & Berntsen, 2013). Remembering negative events well may be functional as this enables people to prevent similar negative events in the future. Maintaining an optimistic view with regard to the future may be functional as this motivates one to explore the environment and set new goals (Cacioppo & Gardner, 1999).

In the studies investigating the relation between temporal focus and thought valence in people’s daily lives described above, participants were asked to report recent past- and future-oriented thoughts using a questionnaire approach (Andrews-Hanna et al., 2013), or were instructed to record autobiographical thoughts about either the past or the future themselves as they occurred using a diary approach (Berntsen and Jacobsen, 2008, Finnbogadóttir and Berntsen, 2013). However, various limitations of these methods make them less suitable for studying mind-wandering. Asking people to report thoughts in a questionnaire study may introduce memory biases (Scollon, Kim-Prieto, & Diener, 2003). For example, people may remember thoughts about one temporal focus better than thoughts about the other temporal focus. Furthermore, instructing participants to report every (or a number of) thoughts about the past or the future as one goes about one’s daily life may be rather difficult for participants: After all, when people are mind-wandering, they are often not aware of this themselves (Smallwood & Schooler, 2015). Supporting this idea, Vannucci, Batool, Pelagatti, and Mazzoni (2014) showed that participants reported more involuntary memories during experimenter probing compared to self-caught probing. Furthermore, it may be difficult for participants to report past- or future-oriented thoughts in an unbiased fashion: Participants may be selective with regard to the thoughts they report (e.g. not mentioning highly negative thoughts), or may be more selective with regard to reporting either past- or future-oriented thoughts (e.g. not mentioning highly negative thoughts regarding the future). Finally, the instruction itself to record thoughts about either the past or the future may lead participants to think more, or in a different manner, about the currently instructed temporal focus. For example, Vannucci et al. (2014) showed that participants reported more involuntary memories when explicitly asked to report involuntary memories than when asked to report involuntary thoughts in general.

These limitations can be reduced by an experience sampling approach using random signaling. This method entails that participants carry a device (e.g. a smartphone) with them for an extended period of time, and they receive signals requiring them to fill out a questionnaire at random moments during the day. This allows researchers to sample a large number of representative moments in people’s daily lives (Scollon et al., 2003). As such, the first aim of the present study was to investigate whether thoughts about the future also show a greater positivity bias for the broader category of mind-wandering with an experience sampling study using random signaling.1

As mentioned earlier, whereas a number of studies investigated the relation between temporal focus and thought valence, previous studies provide limited insight into the relation between temporal distance and the frequency of negative and positive past- and future-oriented thoughts.2 Construal Level Theory states that temporal distance increases the abstractness of one’s thoughts (Trope & Liberman, 2003). When thinking in an abstract manner, people tend to focus on the reasons for their actions (why’s). However, when thinking in a concrete manner, people tend to focus on the actions that are required to achieve their goals (how’s). As why’s (e.g. losing weight) are typically more positive than how’s (e.g. eating less; see Liberman & Trope, 1998), thoughts about the distant past or future may well be more positive compared to thoughts about the near past or future (see also Williams, Stein, & Galguera, 2014). Contemplating negative events in the recent past may be functional as it fosters learning and potentially behavior change. Considering potential negative events in the near future may be functional as this allows one to undertake action to avoid these negative events. However, thinking about things that may obstruct one’s goal pursuit in the distant future might not be very practical, as one knows relatively little about the circumstances that may be relevant in the distant future.

Previous studies did not investigate the relation between temporal distance and the frequency of negative and positive thoughts for the past. For future-oriented mind-wandering, one lab study did not find a relation between temporal distance and affective valence (Stawarczyk et al., 2013). Another study did show a difference in valence between near and distant future-oriented thoughts. Participants were asked to imagine events that could happen to them on a bad or a good day in the near or distant future, and to rate these events on valence. While participants imagined good and bad days in the near future as relatively diverse in terms of negative and positive events (e.g. they also imagined some neutral or slightly negative events on a positive day), participants imagined the distant future as prototypically bad or good (Liberman, Sagristano, & Trope, 2002; also see Construal Level Theory; Trope & Liberman, 2003). Furthermore, another study showed that students were more optimistic about their performance in the distant (as opposed to the near) past and future (Gilovich, Kerr, & Medvec, 1993), suggesting that thoughts about the distant past and future are more positive. It seems that students considered daily hassles, situational details, and potential problems to a lesser extent for the distant past and future.

The study by Stawarczyk et al. (2013) did not show a relation between temporal distance and mind-wandering valence for future-oriented thoughts. The other two studies described above suggest that the frequency of positive thoughts may increase with temporal distance. However, the first study was only concerned with future events, and event valence was manipulated in this study (Liberman et al., 2002). The second study was concerned with a single, pre-determined event in either the past or the future, and did not directly measure thought valence (Gilovich et al., 1993). These studies did not directly investigate whether temporal distance increases the frequency of positive thoughts for both the past and the future, when event valence has not been manipulated, and did not investigate mind-wandering specifically. In our study, we aimed to fill in this gap.

We aimed to go beyond previous research in three important ways. First, we aimed to replicate the finding that future-oriented thoughts show a greater positivity bias than past-oriented thoughts for the broader category of mind-wandering employing an experience sampling methodology. Second, we investigated whether there is a relation between the temporal distance of past- and future-oriented thoughts and thought valence. We expect that thoughts about the distant past and future are, overall, more frequently positive compared to thoughts about the near past and future. On the basis of the literature on temporal distance, we do not have reason to believe that temporal focus and temporal distance may interact. Third, in contrast to earlier research in this area that is mostly correlational, we investigated the relation between temporal focus, temporal distance, and the frequency of negative and positive thoughts in a lab experiment inducing a stream of (semi-) naturally occurring thoughts. As such, the experience sampling study (Study 1) provides ecologically valid insights into the relation between temporal focus, temporal distance, and thought valence, while the lab experiment provides insight into these relations under more controlled circumstances (Study 2).

In addition to these main aims, the present study also had one explorative goal concerning the link between mind-wandering and happiness. If mind-wandering about the future is on average more positive compared to mind-wandering about the past, are people on average happier while mind-wandering about the future than while mind-wandering about the past? Berntsen and Jacobsen (2008) included a mood measure in their diary study, but did not find a relation between temporal focus and mood. However, no study investigated the relation between temporal focus, temporal distance, and happiness in people’s daily lives with an experience sampling study.

Section snippets

Participants

In total, 207 participants took part in this study. Some participants (n = 46, 22.2%) failed to fill out demographics information. As such, the reported demographics are based on the participants who did fill out this information. The study included 100 women (62.1%) and 61 men (37.9%), and the age of participants ranged from 18 to 72, with an average age of 39.6 years (SD = 14.1). Regarding ethnic background, 154 participants (95.7%) indicated having a Dutch background and seven participants (4.3%)

Participants and design

In total, 79 participants (55 females; average age: 21.97 years, SD = 3.42) took part in this study. Participants were recruited via the Radboud Research Participation System and received EUR 7.5 or course credits for their participation. Forty-three participants were Psychology or Educational Science students, and 36 participants indicated that they were enrolled in another study program. Fifty-nine participants were Dutch, 18 participants were German, and 2 participants indicated that they had

Temporal focus and mind-wandering valence

With regard to temporal focus, the experience sampling as well as the lab study showed that thoughts about the future are on average more positive than thoughts about the past. In the experience sampling study, thoughts about the future were less frequently negative, more frequently neutral, and marginally significantly more often positive compared to thoughts about the past. As such, this was the first experience sampling study showing that the positivity bias is greater for future-oriented

References (53)

  • J.W. Schooler et al.

    The middle way: Finding the balance between mindfulness and mind-wandering

  • J. Smallwood et al.

    When is your head at? An exploration of the factors associated with the temporal focus of the wandering mind

    Consciousness and Cognition

    (2009)
  • J.M. Smith et al.

    A roadmap to rumination: A review of the definition, assessment, and conceptualization of this multifaceted construct

    Clinical Psychology Review

    (2009)
  • D. Stawarczyk et al.

    Concern-induced negative affect is associated with the occurrence and content of mind-wandering

    Consciousness and Cognition

    (2013)
  • D. Stawarczyk et al.

    Mind-wandering: Phenomenology and function as assessed with a novel experience sampling method

    Acta Psychologica

    (2011)
  • J.R. Andrews-Hanna et al.

    A penny for your thoughts: Dimensions of self-generated thought content and relationships with individual differences in emotional wellbeing

    Frontiers in Psychology

    (2013)
  • Barton, K. (2014). MuMIn: Multi-model inference. R package version...
  • Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4....
  • V. Benet-Martínez et al.

    Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1998)
  • J.T. Cacioppo et al.

    Emotion

    Annual Review of Psychology

    (1999)
  • Canty, A., & Ripley, B. (2014). Boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) Functions. R package version...
  • S.N. Cole et al.

    Inducing involuntary and voluntary mental time travel using a laboratory paradigm

    Memory & Cognition

    (2015)
  • A.C. Davison et al.

    Bootstrap methods and their applications

    (1997)
  • Derks, K., Gloudemans, R., & Dijksterhuis, A. (unpublished data). Developing a single target happiness...
  • J. Fox et al.

    An R companion to applied regression

    (2011)
  • A. Gelman et al.

    Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models

    (2006)
  • Cited by (27)

    • The dynamics of affect across the wake-sleep cycle: From waking mind-wandering to night-time dreaming

      2021, Consciousness and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      For healthy individuals, the positivity bias in wakefulness occurs in the absence of threats and has been suggested to underlie approach behaviour, such as exploring the environment and communicating with other members of the social group (Cacioppo & Berntson, 1994, 1999; Diener et al., 2015). Similarly, positively valenced mind-wandering, which is associated with future-oriented thoughts, helps simulate possible future events and plan the best course of action, and as such, underlies problem-solving and creativity (e.g., Smallwood & Andrews-Hanna, 2013; Spronken, Holland, Figner, & Dijksterhuis, 2016). Thus, the positivity bias in active wakefulness and mind-wandering may be an important adaptation supported by the lateral PFC (which is also evolutionarily and developmentally the latest region to mature) ensuring that individuals behave in ways that are beneficial for survival and reproductive success.

    • Children's future-oriented cognition

      2020, Advances in Child Development and Behavior
    • Spontaneous Thought as an Unconstrained Memory Process

      2019, Trends in Neurosciences
      Citation Excerpt :

      That is, memory-optimizing spontaneous thought would prioritize detailed and vivid simulations. Because proximal events are easier to vividly recall than distal ones [109–111], this might explain why much of spontaneous thought gravitates toward psychologically proximal content, such as recent or near-future experiences [18,112–114]. In addition to these testable predictions about the function of spontaneous thought, applying the foraging model allows us to quantify parameters that describe the dynamics of thought.

    • Mind wandering during everyday driving: An on-road study

      2019, Accident Analysis and Prevention
      Citation Excerpt :

      People readily report MW, defined as task-unrelated thought (Smallwood and Schooler, 2006) during both laboratory situations and daily activities (Mooneyham and Schooler, 2013; Smallwood and Schooler, 2015). Experience sampling studies, in which participants are interrupted during their daily life and asked to report their thoughts, have found that MW is reported on between one quarter and half of all responses (Killingsworth and Gilbert, 2010; Song and Wang, 2012; Spronken et al., 2016). MW is also common during driving.

    • Do distinct mind wandering differently disrupt drivers? Interpretation of physiological and behavioral pattern with a data triangulation method

      2018, Consciousness and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      Moreover, MW experience are unaware (during the onset phase) and self-generated (not primed by an external element) while PSTs are aware and intentional. Those features shape the kind of thought (Spronken, Holland, Figner, & Dijksterhuis, 2016) and the intentionality of MW seems promising to explain different impacts of TUTs (Kopp, D’Mello, & Mills, 2015) on drivers’ behavior and physiological signals, and more broadly on their respective dangerousness. Indeed, intentional and unintentional off-task thoughts are underpinned by distinct neural networks which could explain different level of dangerousness (Smith et al., 2006).

    • Do drives drive the train of thought?—Effects of hunger and sexual arousal on mind-wandering behavior

      2017, Consciousness and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      They especially stressed the psychological implications of taking the time perspective of mind wandering into account (e.g., past vs. future-oriented mind wandering). Large parts of future-oriented mind-wandering episodes, for instance, are self-reflective and devoted to personal future goals whereas past oriented mind wandering is less structured (Smallwood et al., 2011; Stawarczyk, Cassol, & D'Argembeau, 2013) and tends to go hand in hand with unhappiness (Smallwood & O'Connor, 2011; Spronken, Holland, Figner, & Dijksterhuis, 2016). Additionally, it has been shown that lacks of mind-wandering awareness are especially harmful to performance on currently ongoing tasks (Smallwood, McSpadden, & Schooler, 2007; Zedelius, Broadway, & Schooler, 2015).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text