↓ Skip to main content

Validation of the Spanish version of the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS)

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validation of the Spanish version of the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS)
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12955-015-0252-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marta Alda, Joaquin Minguez, Jesús Montero-Marin, Margalida Gili, Marta Puebla-Guedea, Paola Herrera-Mercadal, Mayte Navarro-Gil, Javier Garcia-Campayo

Abstract

Boredom, which is a common problem in the general population, has been associated with several psychiatric disorders. The Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS) was developed, based on a theoretically and empirically grounded definition of boredom, to assess this construct. The aim of the present study was to assess the psychometric properties of the Spanish validated version of the MSBS in a multi-age sample recruited from the general population. The patients (N = 303) were recruited from primary care settings. In addition to the sociodemographic variables and the MSBS, the General Health Questionnaire 28 items (GHQ-28), Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS), Negative subscale and the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) were administered. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to analyse the dimensionality of the MSBS. Cronbach's α coefficient was used to analyse the internal consistency of the scale. The consistency of the MSBS over time (test-retest reliability) was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient. The construct validity was examined by calculating Pearson's r correlations between the MSBS with theoretically related and unrelated constructs. Cronbach's α for MSBS was 0.89 (95 % CI, 0.87-0.92), ranging from 0.75 to 0.83 for the 5 subscales. The characteristics of the final sample (N = 303) were that the participants were primarily female (66.77 %) with a mean age of 49.32 years (SD, 11.46) and primarily European (94.71 %). The CFA of the MSBS confirmed that the original five-factor model showed good fit indices: CFI = .96; GFI = .94; SRMR = .05; and RMSEA = .06 [.05-.08]. Cronbach's α for MSBS was 0.89 (95 % CI, 0.87-0.92), ranging from 0.75 to 0.83 for the 5 subscales. The MSBS showed a test-retest coefficient measured with an ICC of 0.90 (95 % CI, 0.88-0.92). The ICC for the 5 subscales ranged from 0.81 to 0.89. The MSBS showed a significant negative correlation with MAAS and a significant positive correlation with the GHQ (total score and subscales) and PANAS-Negative Affect. The Spanish version of the MSBS has been validated as a reliable instrument for measuring boredom in the general population. This study will facilitate the assessment of boredom for clinical and research purposes in Spanish-speaking populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 20%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 15%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 19 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,810,408
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,224
of 2,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,455
of 264,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#14
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.