The authors reexamined the factor structure of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (D. E. Broadbent, P. F. Cooper, P. Fitzgerald, & K. R. Parkes, 1982) and its correlates. The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire was designed to assess a person's likelihood of committing an error in the completion of an everyday task. A principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation yielded 4 internally consistent, interpretable factors. These factors were labeled Memory, Distractibility, Blunders, and (memory for) Names. This study lends partial support for the factor analytic solution proposed by L. K. Pollina, A. L. Greene, R. H. Tunick, and J. M. Puckett (1992). In addition, it extends previous findings by providing initial evidence for the construct validity of the factors established by correlating factor scores with measures of other related constructs (i.e., boredom proneness, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, Type A behavior pattern).

These results suggest that a combination of pharmacologic and behavioral treatment is more effective than drug therapy alone in the long-term management of transformed migraine with analgesic overuse. Confirmation of these findings, as well as extension to other forms of behavioral and cognitive-behavioral treatment, is required.

We analyzed previous exploratory factor analytic structures on the Boredom Proneness Scale (BPS; Farmer & Sundberg, 1986) using confirmatory factor analysis in structural equation modeling in LISREL 8 (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993). These analyses indicated that 2 factors were generally consistent across 6 exploratory models. Items that had significant loadings on these two factors (N = 12; 6 for each factor) indicated a lack of Internal Stimulation and External Stimulation. In further analysis on these 12 items using LISREL, we found a much improved fit and provided support for a short form version of the original BPS. We also found the shortened version to be invariant across gender. We discuss implications for the more precise measurement of boredom proneness and the use of the scale in applied settings.

No abstract

No abstract