Table 6 Summary of results concerning predictions of mind wandering (MW) as a function of concentration and affective daydreaming style

Executive functioning (specifically updating) predicts lower MW as concentration increases

Not supported with MW defined as SITUTs (our a priori), but supported with MW defined as TUTs (Kane et al., 2007, 2017)

Post hoc analysis indicated that this association is not SITUT-specific (i.e., EDs, TRIs show similar relations as SITUTs compared to on-task focus)

Updating predicts lower EDs, SITUTs, and TRIs as concentration increases

Executive functioning (specifically updating) predicts lower MW as guilty-dysphoric style increases

Not supported with updating, but supported with common executive functioning

The symmetry span result in Marcusson-Clavertz et al. (2016) may reflect variance due to common executive functioning rather than updating

Common executive functioning predicts lower SITUTs as guilty-dysphoric style increases

Executive functioning (specifically inhibiting) predicts lower MW as positive-constructive style decreases

Not supported, regardless of operationalization of MW or executive functioning

The Stroop result in Marcusson-Clavertz et al. (2016) might have been a false discovery or reflect variance not captured by the cognitive battery in the present study

–

MW as a function of shifting and daydreaming style

Shifting-specific ability predicted more SITUTs as guilty-dysphoric style increased

The opposite effects of shifting-specific and common executive functioning on the slope of guilty-dysphoric style on MW may reflect a stability-flexibility trade-off that is arguably consistent with the neural network model of Herd et al. (2014)

Shifting-specific ability predicts higher SITUTs as guilty-dysphoric style increases