In Felipe De Brigard & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (eds.), Neuroscience and Philosophy. Cambridge: MIT Press. pp. 389-426 (2022)

Authors
Samuel Murray
Duke University
Zachary C. Irving
University of Virginia
Abstract
The science of mind wandering has rapidly expanded over the past 20 years. During this boom, mind wandering researchers have relied on self-report methods, where participants rate whether their minds were wandering. This is not an historical quirk. Rather, we argue that self-report is indispensable for researchers who study passive phenomena like mind wandering. We consider purportedly “objective” methods that measure mind wandering with eye tracking and machine learning. These measures are validated in terms of how well they predict self-reports, which means that purportedly objective measures of mind wandering retain a subjective core. Mind wandering science cannot break from the cycle of self-report. Skeptics about self-report might conclude that mind wandering science has methodological foundations of sand. We take a rather more optimistic view. We present empirical and philosophical reasons to be confident in self-reports about mind wandering. Empirically, these self-reports are remarkably consistent in their contents and behavioral and neural correlates. Philosophically, self-reports are consistent with our best theories about the function of mind wandering. We argue that this triangulation gives us reason to trust both theory and method.
Keywords mind wandering  passivity  introspection  scientific methodology  machine learning
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Belief and the Will.Bas C. van Fraassen - 1984 - Journal of Philosophy 81 (5):235-256.
Belief and the Will.Bas C. van Fraassen - 2010 - In Antony Eagle (ed.), Philosophy of Probability: Contemporary Readings. Routledge. pp. 235-256.
The Unreliability of Naive Introspection.Eric Schwitzgebel - 2006 - Philosophical Review 117 (2):245-273.

View all 34 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Philosophy of Mind Wandering.Irving Zachary & Thompson Evan - forthcoming - In Fox Kieran & Christoff Kalina (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Spontaneous Thought and Creativity. Oxford University Press.
Can the Mind Wander Intentionally?Samuel Murray & Kristina Krasich - 2022 - Mind and Language 37 (3):432-443.
What Are the Benefits of Mind Wandering to Creativity?Samuel Murray, Nathan Liang, Nick Brosowsky & Paul Seli - forthcoming - Psychology of Creativity, Aesthetics, and the Arts.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-11-16

Total views
131 ( #90,532 of 2,520,750 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
62 ( #12,777 of 2,520,750 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes