The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Short Boredom Proneness Scale: Development and Psychometric Properties
Abstract
It has been evident for some time that the Boredom Proneness Scale (BPS), a commonly used measure of trait boredom, does not constitute a single scale. Factor analytic studies have identified anything from two to seven factors, prompting Vodanovich and colleagues to propose an alternative two factor, short form version Boredom Proneness Scale–Short Form (BPS-SR). The present study further investigates the factor structure and validity of both the BPS and the BPS-SR. The two-factor solution obtained for the BPS-SR appears to be an artifact of item wording of reverse-scored items. These same items may also have contributed to the earlier complexity and inconsistency of results for the full BPS. An eight-item scale of only consistently worded items (i.e., those not requiring reverse scoring) was developed. This new scale demonstrated unidimensionality and the scale score had good internal consistency and construct validity comparable to the original BPS score.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0902_5 · Cited by 16,280
Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research
(2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2769 · Cited by 15,614
A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis
Horn, J. L. (1965) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289447 · Cited by 8,714
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/109442810031002 · Cited by 7,997
Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191105283504 · Cited by 7,511
(1995) · Cited by 6,909
Journal of social behavior and personality
(1986) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/0191-8869(86)90025-5 · Cited by 6,706
Cited by
Carpenter, J. K., Conroy, K., Gomez, A. F., Curren, L. C., & Hofmann, S. G. (2019) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2019.101785 · Cited by 342
Yan, L., Gan, Y., Ding, X., Wu, J., & Duan, H. (2021) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102328 · Cited by 236
Lee, F. K. S., & Zelman, D. C. (2019) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.001 · Cited by 131
Holte, A. J., & Ferraro, F. R. (2020) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106465 · Cited by 122
Elhai, J. D., Yang, H., & Montag, C. (2019) · Current Addiction Reports · doi:10.1007/s40429-019-00260-4 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Struk, A. A., Carriere, J. S. A., Cheyne, J. A., & Danckert, J.
- Venue
- Assessment
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-28
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 346-359
- ISSN
- 1073-1911 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3489
- OpenAlex
- W2278453479
- Cited by
- 359
- References
- 74
- FWCI
- 4.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Short Boredom Proneness Scale: Development and Psychometric Properties. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1073191115609996
- The paper
- Struk, A. A., Carriere, J. S. A., Cheyne, J. A., & Danckert, J. (2017). A Short Boredom Proneness Scale: Development and Psychometric Properties. Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191115609996
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
