SART with Mind-Wandering Probes
SART (Robertson 1997) + mind-wandering probes (Smallwood & Schooler 2006; Christoff 2009 fMRI). The rare No-Go digit creates automatization pressure; commission errors index inhibition failures. Probes measure meta-awareness.
Intermediate: 150 trials, 350 ms
Press space (or tap) for every digit — unless it's 3. Occasionally a probe asks where your attention was just before. Pick the best match.
History
No training records yet
Refs: Robertson 1997; Smallwood & Schooler 2006.
SART + Mind-Wandering Probes · scientific basis
Robertson 1997 established SART; Smallwood & Schooler 2006 made thought probes mainstream; Christoff et al. 2009 PNAS showed mind-wandering engages the default network.
Expert-mode parameters
These are the standard parameters from the canonical paradigm (used by the "Expert" difficulty).
| Parameter | Standard value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Trials (Expert) | 225 | Robertson 1997 |
| Stimulus duration | 250 ms | Robertson 1997 |
| ITI | 900 ms | Robertson 1997 |
| No-Go digit | 3 | Robertson 1997 |
| Thought probes | 4-8 randomly inserted, 45-90 s apart | Smallwood 2006; Christoff 2009 |
Healthy-population norms (by age)
Primary outcomes are No-Go (digit 3) commission rate and response-time coefficient of variation (RT-CV). Thresholds derived from Robertson 1997 (n=75 healthy adults), Smilek 2010 (n=152), Jackson 2012 and Maillet 2016 mean/SD by age; Excellent commission = mean − 1 SD. SART is designed to make inhibition hard, so adult baseline commission is ~38-40%. RT-CV is a robust ADHD marker — lower = more stable. Off-task probe reports decline with age. Assessment mode matches the band to your actual age.
| Age band | Commission Excellent | Commission Mean | RT-CV Mean | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8-9 | ≤ 37% | ~55% | ~0.30 | weak (interpolated) |
| 10-11 | ≤ 33% | ~50% | ~0.26 | weak (interpolated) |
| 12-13 | ≤ 29% | ~45% | ~0.24 | weak (interpolated) |
| 14-15 | ≤ 25% | ~40% | ~0.22 | weak (interpolated) |
| 16-17 | ≤ 23% | ~38% | ~0.21 | weak (interpolated) |
| 18-24 | ≤ 22% | ~40% | ~0.20 | moderate |
| 25-34 | ≤ 21% | ~38% | ~0.20 | moderate |
| 35-44 | ≤ 21% | ~38% | ~0.20 | moderate |
| 45-54 | ≤ 17% | ~35% | ~0.21 | moderate |
| 55-64 | ≤ 14% | ~32% | ~0.23 | moderate |
| 65+ | ≤ 10% | ~28% | ~0.26 | moderate |
Standard output metrics
- ·Commission rate — No-Go errors (inhibition failure)
- ·Go RT CV — RT variability; higher = less stable
- ·Off-task probe rate — Meta-awareness indicator
- ·Pre-error speeding — RT acceleration before errors
Citations
- Robertson, I. H., Manly, T., Andrade, J., Baddeley, B. T., & Yiend, J. (1997). 'Oops!': Performance correlates of everyday attentional failures. Neuropsychologia, 35(6), 747-758. DOI
- Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2006). The restless mind. Psychol Bull, 132(6), 946-958. DOI
- Christoff, K., et al. (2009). Experience sampling during fMRI reveals default network and executive system contributions to mind wandering. PNAS, 106(21), 8719-8724. DOI
- Jackson, J. D., & Balota, D. A. (2012). Mind-wandering in younger and older adults. Psychol Aging, 27(1), 106-119. DOI
- Seli, P., et al. (2015). Motivation, intentionality, and mind wandering. J Exp Psychol LMC, 41(5), 1417-1425. DOI
All reference ranges come from published peer-reviewed literature. For personal training reference only — not a medical diagnosis. Full methodology: docs/PARADIGMS.md.
This tool is for educational and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute medical advice or a clinical diagnosis.