← Blog

Focus, explained

Why boring tasks are so hard to focus on — and what the evidence says helps

The expense report, the data cleaning, the fortieth slide. Nothing about the task is difficult, yet you read the same line three times and reach for your phone. Boredom research explains a good deal of that, offers a few modest fixes, and has one famous result that is far softer than it sounds.

By ComunAI · 19 October 2026 · ~6 min read

Boredom is an attention problem

John Eastwood, Alexandra Frischen, Mark Fenske and Daniel Smilek drew psychodynamic, existential, arousal and cognitive theories into one definition: boredom is "the aversive experience of wanting, but being unable, to engage in satisfying activity". They proposed defining it in terms of attention — you cannot engage attention with the information the activity needs, you notice that you cannot, and you attribute the cause to your surroundings.¹

Erin Westgate and Timothy Wilson's MAC model adds a second route. Boredom can come from an attention mismatch between what a task demands and the mental resources you have — in either direction, too little stimulation or too much — or from a meaning mismatch, when the activity does not serve a goal you value. In their tests, each produced boredom independently of the other.² Evidence: Early for the two-route model — a theory supported so far mainly by its authors' own studies.

Why it eats concentration

Andrew Hunter and John Eastwood found that trait boredom predicted performance on a sustained-attention task over and above depression and self-reported attention problems. Their exploratory data also fitted the reverse direction: attention failures may cause boredom, and sustained-attention tasks may themselves be boring.³ So the arrow may run both ways.

Reinhard Pekrun and colleagues ran five studies with university students in North America and Germany. Students who felt less control over their work, and saw less value in it, reported more boredom; boredom in turn went with more attention problems, less effort and motivation, and lower subsequent performance.⁴ Evidence: Moderate — consistent across five studies and two countries, but students and correlational designs.

Robert Kurzban and colleagues propose that the feeling of mental effort is the felt output of a cost–benefit calculation that weighs the task against the next-best use of the same mental machinery.⁵ Applying that to boredom is our reading of a proposal, not a settled result. Time on task matters too — see the post on session length.

A signal, not a defect

Shane Bench and Heather Lench argue that boredom has a function: it motivates the pursuit of new goals when the current one is no longer beneficial, reducing attention to the task and raising arousal to get you moving. They are clear that the supporting literature is limited.⁶ Evidence: Early. (It is related to mind wandering, but not the same thing.) On this view, the pull toward your phone is not a character flaw but a search for something better, arriving at the wrong moment.

Would you rather have an electric shock?

The most quoted boredom finding comes from Wilson and colleagues. Across 11 studies, participants typically did not enjoy 6 to 15 minutes alone with nothing to do but think. In one study, 67% of men (12 of 18) and 25% of women (6 of 24) gave themselves at least one electric shock during a 15-minute thinking period — a shock they had earlier said they would pay to avoid.⁷

Kieran Fox and colleagues re-examined the original data. Most participants (57%) never shocked themselves, "just thinking" was rated on average as somewhat enjoyable, and 14 of the 18 who used the shock gave curiosity as their reason.⁸ The milder finding does replicate: Nicholas Buttrick and colleagues tested 2,557 people at 12 sites in 11 countries, and in every country those randomly assigned to do something enjoyed it more than those assigned to think for pleasure.⁹ People prefer doing to merely thinking. That they find their own thoughts so aversive they would rather be shocked is Contested.

"Boredom-prone" is harder to measure than it sounds

Much of this research leans on Richard Farmer and Norman Sundberg's 28-item Boredom Proneness Scale.¹⁰ Andriy Struk and colleagues note that factor analyses have found anywhere from two to seven factors in it, and propose an eight-item short scale.¹¹ Read claims about "boredom-prone people" with that in mind.

What the evidence says helps

• Reconnect the task to a reason. Low value predicted boredom in Pekrun's studies, and the MAC model treats missing meaning as its own cause.^2,4 Naming what a dull task is for is a reasonable step, though untested as a fix.
• Make it more interesting, on purpose. Carol Sansone and colleagues found people generated strategies to make a dull task more interesting, and used them mainly when the task was currently boring, they had a reason to continue and a relevant strategy was available. Strategy use went with a changed sense of what the activity was, and a greater likelihood of doing it again.¹² Evidence: Early — one paper of three laboratory studies.
• Fix the mismatch, whichever way it runs. Too easy: add a target or constraint. Too much at once: cut it to one defined step. Our inference from the MAC model,² echoing the challenge–skill research in the post on flow.
• Keep the dull block short and bounded. Also our inference. If the trouble is getting going at all, see why starting is the hardest part.

What about boredom as a creativity boost? Sandi Mann and Rebekah Cadman ran two studies (80 and 90 participants) in which a boring writing or reading task was followed by more creative performance than in controls.¹³ Evidence: Early — two small studies; not a reason to seek boredom out.

Where the evidence stands

The calibrated bottom line

Boring tasks are hard to focus on because boredom is, almost by definition, attention that cannot find a grip — or a task that seems to serve no goal you care about. The research offers no cure. It supports something more modest: notice which mismatch you face, reconnect the task to its reason, make it more interesting where you can, and keep the dull stretch bounded.