Exploring the Utility of the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale
Abstract
Abstract. State boredom – the experience of boredom in the moment – is related to a number of psychosocial issues. Until the recent creation of the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS), research was constrained by the lack of a comprehensive, validated measure. However, the MSBS could benefit from further evaluation. To more thoroughly validate the MSBS. In two studies, participants were induced into a state of either boredom or non-boredom, and then completed the MSBS. Discriminant analysis showed that the full MSBS was able to correctly classify 68.1% (Study 2) – 84.1% (Study 1) of participants into their experimental condition. Based on further DA analysis, a subset of eight items (a potential short form) is proposed. Differential item functioning (Study 1) found only one item to which responding differed by gender. Use of the MSBS, including the full scale versus the short form, is discussed. Which experiential components of boredom may be particularly important for classifying bored individuals, and the issue of variability across boredom manipulations, are also considered.
References
(1977). Boredom and eating in obese and non-obese individuals. Addictive Behaviors, 2, 181–185.
(2012). Real-time predictors of suicidal ideation: Mobile assessment of hospitalized depressed patients. Psychiatry Research, 197, 55–59.
(2011). Lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and monte carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software, 39(8), 1–30.
(2004). Boredom proneness in anger and aggression: Effects of impulsiveness and sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1615–1627.
(1989). The experience of boredom: The role of the self-perception of attention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 315–320.
(2005). Time flies when you’re having fun: Temporal estimation and the experience of boredom. Brain and Cognition, 59, 236–245.
(1994). Speed [Motion picture]. CA, USA: Twentieth Century Fox.
(2007). A desire for desires: Boredom and its relation to alexithymia. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1035–1045.
(2012). The unengaged mind: Defining boredom in terms of attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 482–495.
(2009). Does a lack of life meaning cause boredom? Results from psychometric, longitudinal, and experimental analyses. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 307–340.
(2013). Development and validation of the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS). Assessment, 20, 68–85. doi: 10.1177/1073191111421303
(1962). Man’s search for meaning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
(2011). Boredom: An emotional experience distinct from apathy, anhedonia, or depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30, 647–666.
(2013).
Pilot [Television series episode.] In D. J. GoorC. MillerD. MinerP. LordM. Schur (Executive producers), Brooklyn Nine-Nine. New York, NY: Fox Broadcasting.(1974).
Cognitive manipulation of boredom . In H. LondonR. NisbettEds., Thought and feeling (pp. 44–59). Chicago, IL: Aldine.(2012). Exploring the relationship between boredom and sustained attention. Experimental Brain Research, 221, 59–67.
(2014). Identifying a reliable boredom induction. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 119, 237–253.
(2012). Risky decision making in adults with ADHD. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 43, 938–946.
(2014). Causes of boredom: The person, the situation, or both? Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 122–126.
(2013). Is trait boredom redundant? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32, 897–916.
(2014). Characterizing the psychophysiological signature of boredom. Experimental Brain Research, 232, 484–491. doi: 10.1007/s00221-013-3755-2
(2015). Culture and state boredom: A comparison between European Canadians and Chinese. Personality and individual differences, 75, 13–18.
(1998). SIG-GRAPH 98: Computer graphics conference proceedings video tape [Video recording]. New York, NY: ACM SIGGRAPH.
(1998).
What’s so boring about vigilance? . In R. R. HoffmanM. F. SherrickJ. S. WarmEds., Viewing Psychology as a whole: The integrative science of William N. Dember (pp. 145–166). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.(2006). Fashion groups, gender, and boredom proneness. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28, 66–74.
(1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361–370.
(2013). The dimensions of state boredom: Frequency, duration, unpleasantness, consequences and causal attributions. Educational Research International, 1, 32–40.
(1981). Volition, performance of a boring task, and time estimation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 52, 865–866.
(2011). On boredom and social identity: A pragmatic meaning-regulation approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1679–1691. doi: 10.1177/0146167211418530
(2012). On boredom: Lack of challenge and meaning as distinct boredom experiences. Motivation and Emotion, 36, 181–194. doi: 10.1007/s11031-011-9234-9
. (1995). Easy English: Using numbers and money [DVD]. Manasquan, NJ: Author.
(2003). Psychometric measures of boredom: A review of the literature. Journal of Psychology, 137, 569–596.
(1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense. Retrieved from http://www.educ.ubc.ca/faculty/zumbo/DIF/handbook.pdf
