MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400142532 · doi:10.1145/3643834.3661590

Not All Those Who (Mind-)Wander Are Lost: Exploring Game-Unrelated Thoughts

2024· article· en· W4400142532 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDesigning Interactive Systems Conference · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMind wandering and attention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs), colloquially referred to as mind-wandering or daydreaming, are phenomena that can interfere with attention and focus, but are also associated with mental health, creativity, and learning. In digital games, it is unclear how players experience game-unrelated thoughts (GUTs), whether GUTs should be encouraged by game designers, or how it may impact player experience. We ran an initial study to confirm whether GUTs are common (50 of 100 participants reported experiencing them). We then collected 840 minutes of gameplay data from 12 participants playing games they: (1) found relaxing, (2) lost track of time in, and (3) spent most hours playing. Eye-tracking data and experience sampling were used to contextualize a phenomenological analysis of gameplay data. We identified four themes encompassing gameplay, GUTs, and gaze behaviour: these provide a foundation for future research and game design incorporating GUTs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.224
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.110 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it