Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Representative Inner Speech Questionnaires
Open accessAbstract
Inner speech is frequently assessed using self-report scales, but their validity is understudied. Uttl et al. (2011) found moderate correlations, perhaps because measures tap into different dimensions of inner speech. We expand on these preliminary results by investigating reliability and concurrent validity of seven inner speech questionnaires in a larger sample. Our results indicate that inner speech questionnaires are reliable but hold moderate concurrent validity, in line with Uttl and colleagues’ (2011) results. Specifically, our results suggest that some inner speech scales may capture a general conception of inner speech, while others may assess evaluative components of negative self-talk, self-regulation, and self-reflective processes, but not emotional valence. The results hold implications around further validity investigations of inner speech measures.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Self-report measures such as questionnaires are the most direct method for finding out about a person's inner speech.
“The most direct method for finding out about a person's IS is through self-report measures such as questionnaires [12]”
From Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool (2023) · cites this paper as [12]
The Introduction (page not provided) says self-report questionnaires are by far the most popular method for assessing inner speech. It does not say they are the most direct method, and notes that they rely on retrospection. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology
Alderson-Day, B., & Fernyhough, C. (2015) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000021 · Cited by 808 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Inner speech serves various cognitive functions, among which are self-regulation, problem solving, decision-making (Alderson-Day & Fernyhough, 2015), memory (Larsen et al., 2002), and self-re fl ection (Morin, 2018).”
BackgroundInner speech and bilingual autobiographical memory: a Polish–Danish cross-cultural study
Larsen, S. F., Schrauf, R. W., Fromholt, P., & Rubin, D. C. (2002) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658210143000218 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Duncan, R. M., & Cheyne, J. A. (1999) · Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · doi:10.1037/h0087081 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Types of inner dialogues and functions of self-talk: comparisons and implications
Oleś, P. K., Brinthaupt, T. M., Dier, R., & Polak, D. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00227 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Are Inner Speech Self-Report Questionnaires Reliable and Valid?
Uttl, B., Morin, A., & Hamper, B. (2011) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.332 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- Alderson-Day B. Mitrenga K. Wilkinson S. McCarthy-Jones S. Fernyhough C. (2018). The varieties of inner speech questionnaire – Revised (VISQ-R): Replicating and refining links between inner speech and psychopathology. Consciousness and Cognition, 65, 48– 58. 10.1016/j.concog.2018.07.001 30041067 PMC6204885 · DOI · Paper page
- Brinthaupt T. M. Hein M. B. Kramer T. E. (2009). The self-talk scale: Development, factor analysis, and validation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(1), 82– 92. 10.1080/00223890802484498 19085287 · DOI
- Brinthaupt T. M. Morin A. Uttl B. (2022). Comparing incomparables: Response to “Measuring the Frequency of Inner-Experience Characteristics” (Hurlburt et al., 2021). Submitted. PMC10910013 38440248
- Calvete E. Estévez A. Landín C. Martínez Y. Cardeñoso O. Villardón L. Villa A. (2005). Self-talk and affective problems in college students: Valence of thinking and cognitive content specificity. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 8(1), 56– 67. 10.1017/s1138741600004960 15875458 · DOI · Paper page
- Gault R. H. (1907). A history of the questionnaire method of research in psychology. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 14(3), 366– 383. 10.1080/08919402.1907.10532551 · DOI
- Heavey C. L. Hurlburt R. T. (2008). The phenomena of inner experience. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(3), 798- 810. 10.1016/j.concog.2007.12.006 18258456 · DOI · Paper page
- Heavey C. L. Moynihan S. A. Brouwers V. P. Lapping-Carr L. Krumm A. E. Kelsey J. M. Turner D. K. II Hurlburt R. T. (2019). Measuring the frequency of inner-experience characteristics by self-report: The nevada inner experience questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2615. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02615 30687148 PMC6338092 · DOI
- Honeycutt J. M. (2015). Imagined interaction theory: Mental representations of interpersonal communication. In Braithwaite D. O. Schrodt P. (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp. 75– 87). SAGE.
- Hurlburt R. T. (2017). Descriptive experience sampling. In Velmans M. Schneider S. (Eds.), Blackwell companion to consciousness (2nd ed). Blackwell.
- Hurlburt R. T. Heavey C. L. Lapping-Carr L. Krumm A. E. Moynihan S. A. Kaneshiro C. Brouwers V. P. Turner D. K. Kelsey J. M. (2021). Measuring the frequency of inner-experience characteristics. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(2), 559– 571. 10.1177/1745691621990379 34283671 · DOI
- Kendall P. C. Howard B. L. Hays R. C. (1989). Self-referent speech and psychopathology: The balance of positive and negative thinking. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 13(6), 583– 598. 10.1007/bf01176069 · DOI
- Morin A. (2005). Possible links between self-awareness and inner speech: Theoretical background, underlying mechanisms, and empirical evidence. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12(4-5), 115– 134.
- Morin A. (2012). Inner speech. In Hirstein W. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (2nd ed, pp. 436– 443). Elsevier.
- Morin A. (2018). The self-reflective functions of inner speech: Thirteen years later. In Langland-Hassan P. Vicente A. (Eds.), Inner speech: New voices. Oxford University Press. 30907999
- Perona-Garcelán S. Bellido-Zanin G. Senín-Calderón C. López-Jiménez A. M. Rodríguez-Testal J. F. (2017). Spanish adaptation of the varieties of inner speech questionnaire (VISQ): Study of the relationship between inner speech, dissociation, and hallucination proneness. Clínica Y Salud, 28(2), 93– 100. 10.1016/j.clysa.2017.02.001 · DOI
- Perrone-Bertolotti M. Rapin L. Lachaux J.-P. Baciu M. Lœvenbruck H. (2014). What is that little voice inside my head? Inner speech phenomenology, its role in cognitive performance, and its relation to self-monitoring. Behavioural Brain Research, 261, 220– 239. 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.12.034 24412278 · DOI · Paper page
- Racy F. Morin A. Duhnych C. (2019). Using a thought listing procedure to construct the general inner speech questionnaire: An ecological approach. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 33(4), 385– 405. 10.1080/10720537.2019.1633572 · DOI
- Shi X. Brinthaupt T. M. McCree M. (2017). Understanding the influence of self-critical, self-managing, and social-assessing self-talk on performance outcomes in a public speaking context. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 36(4), 356– 378. 10.1177/0276236617708740 · DOI
- Siegrist M. (1995). Inner speech as a cognitive process mediating self-consciousness and inhibiting self-deception. Psychological Reports, 76(1), 259– 265. 10.2466/pr0.1995.76.1.259 7770577 · DOI
- Vygotsky L. S. (1962). Thought and language. MIT. 10.1037/11193-000 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool
Fernyhough, C., & Borghi, A. M. (2023) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2023.08.014 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
“The most direct method for finding out about a person's IS is through self-report measures such as questionnaires [12], although responses on such instruments (Box 2) have the weakness of potentially being distorted by the preconceptions of the participants about what type of mind”
The psychometric properties of the varieties of inner speech questionnaire-revised in Hebrew
Sabag, T., Zohar, A. H., Kreiner, H., Lev-Ari, L., & Rabinowitz, D. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1092223 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Racy, F., Morin, A., & Hagerty, J.
- Affiliations
- MA I/O Psychology, Independent Researcher
- Mount Royal University (CA)
- Independent Researcher
- Corresponding author
- Racy, Famira
- Venue
- Psychological Reports
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-06-13
- Volume
- 127
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 994-1002
- ISSN
- 0033-2941 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-691X
- PMC
- PMC10926316
- OpenAlex
- W4282832717
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2
- FWCI
- 1.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Psychological Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Mount Royal University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Representations and Identity
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Keywords
- inner speech, concurrent validity, reliability statistics, self-report measures, negative self-talk, self-regulation, self-reflection, emotional valence
- MeSH terms
- Emotions, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Speech, Reproducibility of Results, Self Report
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
