Does the Boredom Proneness Scale capture traitness of boredom? Results from a six-year longitudinal trait-state-occasion model

Gana, Kamel; Broc, Guillaume; Bailly, Nathalie

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.11.030

Cited by 27 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Long-term boredom and people's propensity for boredom have been conceptualized as boredom proneness (Farmer & Sundberg, 1986). The accuracy and appropriateness of this conceptualization are debated (e.g., Gana et al, 2019), but, for the purpose of our thesis, it suffices to underscore that the construct is associated with an array of health and at-risk behaviors, such as depressive symptoms (Fahlman et al, 2009;Goldberg et al, 2011;Malkovsky, Merrifield et al, 2012), anxiety (Fahlman et al, 2009), apathy, anhedonia (Goldberg et al, 2011), binge drinking (Biolcati et al, 2016), and problematic Internet use (Skues et al, 2016). Given substantial evidence on the relationship between chronic boredom and well-being, it is important to understand what makes one chronically bored, whereby we may develop potential interventions.…”

Section: V) Implications For Chronic Boredommentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention Drifting In and Out: The Boredom Feedback Model

Tam

Tilburg

Chan

et al. 2021

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We synthesize established and emerging research to propose a feedback process model that explicates key antecedents, experiences, and consequences of the emotion boredom. The proposed Boredom Feedback Model posits that the dynamic process of boredom resembles a feedback loop that centers on attention shifts instigated by inadequate attentional engagement. Inadequate attentional engagement is a discrepancy between desired and actual levels of attentional engagement and is a product of external and internal influences, reflected in objective resources and cognitive appraisals. The model sheds light on several essential yet unresolved puzzles in the literature, including how people learn to cope with boredom, how to understand the relation between self-control and boredom, how the roles of attention and meaning in boredom can be integrated, why boredom is associated with both high- and low-arousal negative emotions, and what contributes to chronic boredom. The model offers testable hypotheses for future research.

show abstract

Section: V) Implications For Chronic Boredommentioning

confidence: 99%

Attention Drifting In and Out: The Boredom Feedback Model

Tam

Tilburg

Chan

et al. 2021

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But there is more. In a 6‐year study that included older participants (mean age >70), Gana, Broc and Bailly (2019) explored once again the factorial structure of measures of boredom proneness and examined whether such measures capture trait boredom or whether they are affected by the state the participants are in when they are completing the measures. Gana et al found no evidence either for the unidimensionality of the original 28‐item BPS (as claimed by Farmer & Sundberg, 1986) or for the two‐factor models of BPS proposed by Gana and Akremi (1998) and Vodanovich et al (2005).…”

Section: Heterogeneity In Boredom Pronenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is boredom one or many? A functional solution to the problem of heterogeneity

Elpidorou

2020

Mind & Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite great progress in our theoretical and empirical investigations of boredom, a basic issue regarding boredom remains unresolved: It is still unclear whether the construct of boredom is a unitary one or not. By surveying the relevant literature on boredom and arousal, the paper makes a case for the unity of the construct of boredom. It argues, first, that extant empirical findings do not support the heterogeneity of boredom, and, second, that a theoretically motivated and empirically grounded model of boredom (the functional account) supports the view that the construct of boredom is a unitary one.

show abstract

“…This is consistent with experience sampling data, which suggests that “trait” boredom may largely reflect situational variance in activity (Chin et al, 2017), rather than trait‐like individual differences. Indeed, recent longitudinal work found only 28% of variance in the BPS scale to be due to trait‐like differences in boredom; the majority of variance (64%) was due to measurement error (Gana, Broc, & Bailly, 2019).…”

Section: Lost By Definition: Is Boredom An Emotion?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lost by definition: Why boredom matters for psychology and society

Westgate

Steidle

2020

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long overlooked, boredom has drawn increasing attention across multiple subfields of psychology (including clinical, developmental, educational, cognitive, and industrial/organizational psychology), as well as economics, philosophy, neuroscience, and animal cognition. In this article, we review and integrate this work by providing a social psychological perspective on boredom as an emotion and its role in signaling the need for change to restore successful attention in meaningful activity. In doing so, we discuss the implications of that approach for understanding boredom cross‐culturally and cross‐species, and identify opportunities for targeted interventions to reduce boredom and improve well‐being.

show abstract

Does the Boredom Proneness Scale capture traitness of boredom? Results from a six-year longitudinal trait-state-occasion model

Cited by 27 publications

References 39 publications

Attention Drifting In and Out: The Boredom Feedback Model

Attention Drifting In and Out: The Boredom Feedback Model

Is boredom one or many? A functional solution to the problem of heterogeneity

Lost by definition: Why boredom matters for psychology and society

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About