Cited by 44Social Representations and IdentityAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMind wandering and attention

Are Inner Speech Self-Report Questionnaires Reliable and Valid?

Open access
Uttl, Bob, Morin, Alain, Hamper, Breanne·2011·Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

Abstract

People often talk to themselves for various reasons, including self-regulation, problem solving, and decision making. We examined the reliability and validity of several self-report measures of inner speech in a sample of 380 undergraduate students. Participants were asked to list as many instances of what they talk to themselves about as they could recall and they also completed several widely-used self-report measures of inner speech, including the Self-Verbalization Questionnaire, the Self- Talk Scale, the Inner Speech Questionnaire, the Self-Talk Inventory, and the Rumination-Reflection Questionnaire. The results showed that self-reports of inner speech are reliable but have only limited validity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.332

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Although self-report scales often report acceptable psychometric reliability, correlations among scales can be weak, indicating limited validity, or that scales are measuring different aspects of a complex, multifaceted construct.

    “Although such scales often report acceptable psychometric reliability, correlations among scales can be weak (Uttl, Morin, & Hamper, 2011), indicating limited validity, or that scales are measuring different aspects of a complex, multifaceted construct.”

    From Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology (2015) · cites this paper as Uttl, Morin, & Hamper, 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Uttl, B., Morin, A., & Hamper, B.
Affiliations
Mount Royal University (CA)
Corresponding author
Uttl, Bob
Venue
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011
Volume
30
Pages
1719-1723
ISSN
1877-0428 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2055073047
Cited by
44
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.37
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Representations and Identity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
Keywords
inner speech, self-talk, self-report measures, reliability statistics, validity, self-regulation, rumination

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review