%0 Journal Article
%T 自发走神和有意走神及其与元认知的关系
%A 刘兆敏
%A 高伟伟
%A 罗湘齐
%J 心理科学
%D 2017
%X 摘要： 走神包括有意走神和自发走神两种类型，而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）走神包括有意走神和自发走神两种类型；（2）失控和危险感既可以预测自发走神也可以预测有意走神，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。</br>Abstract: Recent research has demonstrated that mind wandering can be subdivided into spontaneous and deliberate types. The former involves 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 attempts have been made to evaluate the relationship between metacognition and these subtypes of mind wandering at 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 197 college students. They completed two questionnaires. One is the Mind Wandering Scale, which consist of a Deliberate Mind Wandering Scale (MW-D) and a Spontaneous Mind Wandering Scale (MW-S) (Carriere, Seli, & Smilek, 2013). The other scale is the Metacognition Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), which was based on the longer original version of the same instrument (Cartwright-Hatton & Wells, 1997).The MCQ-30 measures beliefs about thinking and thinking processes on five subscales(positive beliefs, uncontrollability and danger, cognitive confidence, need 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, making sure the study is accurate enough in terms of common method variance. The results showed that: (1) the confirmatory factor analysis yielded a two-component solution, indicated that two factors of mind wandering( c2/df=1.98，RMSEA=0.073，TLI=0.97，CFI=0.98) were best captured by a distinction between spontaneous mind wandering and deliberate, willful mind wandering. (2) Metacognition was positively correlate with MW-D，and MW-S. Two factor of metacognition( cognitive confidence，uncontrollability and danger) were both correlate with MW-D and MW-S. (3)A stepwise multiple regression analysis was conduct to evaluate the unique contributions of each metacognition factor to the subtypes of mind wandering. A dissociation between mind-wander
%K spontaneous mind wandering deliberate mind wandering metacognition
%U http://www.psysci.org/CN/abstract/abstract9970.shtml