Cognitive failures, metacognitive beliefs and aging

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Personality and Individual Differences 40 (2006) 1453–1459

Cognitive failures, metacognitive beliefs and aging

Luciano Mecacci *, Stefania Righi

Dipartimento di Psicologia, Universita degli Studi di Firenze, via s. Niccolo 93, 50125 Firenze, Italy

Received 12 May 2004; received in revised form 9 November 2005; accepted 10 November 2005Available online 7 Februry 2006

Abstract

A sample of 1826 Italian participants (age range: 16–85 years) was administered the Cognitive FailuresQuestionnaire to verify the effect of aging on the self-report of cognitive lapses. Elderly people reported alower frequency of cognitive failures than young participants. A subgroup of participants (N = 165; agerange: 18–85 years) was administered the Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire and Thought Control Question-naire to assess the relationship between the self-evaluation of cognitive abilities and the metacognitive mon-itoring-control as a function of aging. People with a self-reported high frequency of cognitive failures statedthat they carefully monitor their cognitive activities, but this result was independent of age. Paradoxically,elderly people claimed to have remarkable worries about their own cognitive abilities, but they did not seemto be able to record the cognitive lapses that are known to become more frequent with aging.� 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Cognitive Failures Questionnaire; Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire; Thought Control Questionnaire; Cog-nitive failures; Metacognition; Aging

1. Introduction

Aging is known to have a relevant influence on cognitive processes and to change cognitive per-formance deeply (general reviews in Craik & Salthouse, 2000; Dixon, Backman, & Nilsson, 2004).

0191-8869/$ - see front matter � 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.022

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 55 2491628; fax: +39 55 2345326.E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Mecacci).

mailto:[email protected]

1454 L. Mecacci, S. Righi / Personality and Individual Differences 40 (2006) 1453–1459

This influence may be studied on both the plan of the performance assessed by objective tests, andthe plan of the subjective experience the elderly person has of their own cognitive activity. Manystudies have shown that the objective performance and the self-evaluation do not always give sim-ilar results (Dixon et al., 2004). If it is true that self-evaluation cannot be used as the sole source ofinformation on the degrees of objective performance (Rabbitt, 1990; Rabbitt & Abson, 1990,1991), it is nevertheless certain that it is interesting to verify if and why there is a dissociationbetween self-evaluation and objective performance.

A widespread instrument to study self-evaluation of cognitive processes is the Cognitive Fail-ures Questionnaire (CFQ) devised by Broadbent, Cooper, Fitzgerald, and Parkes (1982). Partic-ipants are asked to indicate the frequency of minor lapses, slips or errors in perception, attention,memory, and motor functions they experience. CFQ scores correlate with performance in atten-tion tasks (Manly, Robertson, Galloway, & Hawkins, 1999; Robertson, Manly, Andrade, Badde-ley, & Yiend, 1997; Tipper & Baylis, 1987), and are related to the frequency of involvement intraffic accidents (Broadbent, Broadbent, & Jones, 1986; Klumb, 1995; Larson, Adelrton, Neidef-fer, & Underhill, 1997; Martin & Jones, 1983). Moreover, CFQ scores are related to personalitytraits, anxiety, and stress (Broadbent et al., 1982; Houston, 1989; Mahoney, Dalby, & King, 1998;Matthews, Coyle, & Craig, 1990; Matthews & Wells, 1988; Merckelbach, Muris, Nijman, & deJing, 1996), and also to boredom, sleepiness and circadian typology (Mecacci, Righi, & Rocchetti,2004; Wallace, Vodanovich, & Restino, 2003).

Self-report of cognitive failures may be considered a process associated with metacognitivebeliefs and to the ability to monitor and to control one’s own cognitive activities. Indeed a po-sitive correlation was found between CFQ scores and scores of the Meta-Cognition Question-naire or MCQ (Cartwright-Hatton & Wells, 1997): the higher the frequency of self-reportedcognitive failures was, the greater was the confidence in one’s own cognitive processes andthe more urgent was the need to control excessive or troublesome worries about them. Thusone may expect that elderly people would (a) report a higher frequency of cognitive lapsesand (b) claim the urgency of a stricter cognitive self-control. To investigate these two issues,first, the trend of self-report of cognitive failures was assessed in a large sample of youngand elderly participants; and, second, the relationship between self-report of cognitive failures,metacognitive beliefs and cognitive-control strategies (as assessed by MCQ, and Thought Con-trol Questionnaire or TCQ by Wells & Davies (1994)) was investigated in a subsample of par-ticipants as a function of aging.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

A sample of 1826 participants (1180 females and 646 males; age range: 16–85 years, M = 31.1and SD = 16.2) was administered the CFQ. As regards education level, this ‘‘total’’ sample washeterogeneous: from students of high schools to University undergraduate students, from post-graduate students to aged people with different degrees of education. In order to reduce the effectof education level, a ‘‘partial’’ subgroup was drawn from the general sample and was made up ofpeople (N = 165; 126 females and 39 males; age range: 18–85 years, M = 52.9 and SD = 21) with

L. Mecacci, S. Righi / Personality and Individual Differences 40 (2006) 1453–1459 1455

at least a secondary-school diploma. Young participants (18–29 years) were undergraduate stu-dents of the Faculty of Psychology of Florence University, the older group consisted of studentsof a free course in Psychology in the same University. Most of the participants were females, as istypical of the student population of psychology courses in Italian universities.

2.2. Materials

2.2.1. Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ)The CFQ consists of 25 items related to everyday slips or errors in perception, memory, and

motor functions (Broadbent et al., 1982; Wallace, 2004; Wallace, Kass, & Stanny, 2002; Italianversion: Mecacci et al., 2004). Participants are asked to indicate, on a 5-point scale (0 = never,4 = always), how often they have experienced the particular error described by the question(e.g., ‘‘Do you bump into people?’’, ‘‘Do you fail to listen to people’s names when you are meetingthem?’’, ‘‘Do you forget where you put something like a newspaper or a book?’’). Total scoresrange from 0 to 100, from total absence to highly frequent occurrence of lapses. Cronbach coef-ficient alpha is 0.81.

2.2.2. Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire (MCQ)The MCQ consists of 65 items related to beliefs about worry and intrusive thoughts (Cart-

wright-Hatton & Wells, 1997; Italian version: Wells, 2002). Participants are asked to indicate,on a 4-point scale (1 = ‘‘do not agree’’, 2 = ‘‘agree slightly’’, 3 = ‘‘agree moderately’’, and4 = ‘‘agree very much’’), the degree of accord with a series of statements. Scores for the followingscales are obtained: (1) Positive Beliefs About Worry (e.g., ‘‘Worrying helps me to get thingssorted out in my mind’’ and ‘‘I need to worry in order to get things done); (2) Negative BeliefsAbout the Uncontrollability of Thoughts and Corresponding Danger (e.g., ‘‘Worrying is danger-ous for me’’ and ‘‘My thoughts interfere with my concentration’’); (3) Cognitive Confidence (e.g.,‘‘I have a poor memory’’ and ‘‘I am easily distracted’’); (4) Negative Beliefs About Thoughts inGeneral, including superstition, punishment and responsibility (e.g., ‘‘Not being able to controlmy thoughts is a sign of weakness’’ and ‘‘If a bad thing happens which I have not worried about,I feel responsible’’); (5) Cognitive Self-Consciousness (e.g., ‘‘I think a lot about my thoughts’’ and‘‘I am constantly aware of my thinking’’). Coefficient alphas are: Positive Beliefs (0.87), Uncon-trollability and Danger (0.89), Cognitive Confidence (0.84), Negative Beliefs (0.74), CognitiveSelf-Consciousness (0.72).

2.2.3. Thought Control Questionnaire (TCQ)The TCQ consists of 30 items related to strategies used to control unpleasant and unwanted

thoughts (Wells & Davies, 1994; Italian version: Wells, 2002). Participants are asked to indicate,on a 4-point scale (0 = never, 4 = quite always), how often they have used a special strategy formanaging intrusive thoughts. Five main groups of strategies (or scales) may be extracted: (1) Dis-traction (e.g., ‘‘I think pleasant thoughts instead’’), (2) Punishment (e.g., ‘‘I punish myself forthinking the thought’’), (3) Reappraisal (e.g., ‘‘I analyse the thought rationally’’), (4) Worry(e.g., ‘‘I worry about more minor things instead’’), and (5) Social Control (e.g., ‘‘I talk to a friendabout the thought’’). Cronbach coefficient alphas are: Distraction (0.72), Punishment (0.64),Reappraisal (0.67), Worry (0.71), Social Control (0.79).


3. Results

In the total sample a gender difference in CFQ scores was found, with females (M = 41.81,SD = 10.96) claiming a greater frequency of cognitive failures than males (M = 40.01,SD = 10.7) (t = 3.39; P < 0.01). Moreover, CFQ scores decreased significantly with aging(r = �0.177; P < 0.001).

Mean scores (and SDs) for each scale for the partial sample are reported in Table 1. Correla-tions, among age and scores of CFQ, MCQ, and TCQ scales are reported in Table 2. As concernsage significant positive correlations were found with three MCQ scales (Positive Beliefs AboutWorry; Cognitive Confidence; Negative Beliefs About Thoughts in General), and three TCQscales (Distraction; Punishment; Worry). Significant negative correlations were found betweenage and CFQ (r = �0.234; P < 0.001), and two TCQ scales (Reappraisal; Social Control). As con-cerns CFQ significant positive correlations were found with three MCQ scales (Negative BeliefsAbout the Uncontrollability of Thoughts and Corresponding Danger About Worry; CognitiveConfidence, Negative Beliefs About Thoughts in General). A significant negative correlationswas found with one TCQ scale (distraction).

Multiple regression analysis was calculated for the partial-sample scores, with the dependentvariable being the CFQ-score and predictors being the age and the scales of MCQ and TCQ. Re-sults were significant (F3,164= 31.93, P < 0.0001; R2 = 0.37), with scale Cognitive Confidence ofMCQ weighting the most (b = 0.42; P < 0.0001), followed by age (b = �0.35; P < 0.0001), andscale Negative Beliefs about Uncontrollability and Danger (b = 0.23; P < 0.001).

To verify whether self-reported cognitive failures are linearly related to age across the entire agerange of our groups of participants, CFQ scores were regressed on age and age squared. In thetotal sample the effect of the variable age (linear regression) was found to be larger than the var-iable age squared (quadratic regression) (age coefficient = �0.1191, SE = 0.015, t = �7.692,P < 0.0001; age squared coefficient = �0.0019, SE = 0.001, t = �1.731, P = n.s.). The same result

Table 1Mean (M) and standard deviations (SD) of scores (partial sample; N = 165) for Cognitive Failures Questionnaire andfor the scales of the Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire and Thought Control Questionnaire

M SD

Cognitive Failures Questionnaire 36.9 11.6

Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire

Positive beliefs 37.8 10.2Uncontrollability and danger 35.2 9.6Cognitive confidence 21.6 6.2Negative beliefs about thoughts 25.4 6.4Cognitive self-consciousness 19.9 4.3

Thought Control Questionnaire

Distraction 16.8 3.4Punishment 10.2 3.8Reappraisal 13.2 3.3Social control 10.4 2.3Worry 12.9 3.5

Table 2Pearson correlations among age and scores for Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) and for the scales of Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire (PB = positive beliefs, UD = uncontrollability and danger, CC = cognitive confidence,NB = negative beliefs about thought, CSC = cognitive self-consciousness), and Thought Control Questionnaire(D = distraction, P = punishment, R = reappraisal, W = worry, SC = social control)

Age CFQ PB UD CC NB CSC D P R W SC

Age –CFQ �0.234** –PB 0.263** 0.033 –UD 0.069 0.420** 0.189* –CC 0.247** 0.452** 0.154* 0.495** –NB 0.295** 0.256** 0.563** 0.598** 0.407** –CSC 0.003 0.090 0.115 0.232** 0.185* 0.335** –D 0.324** �0.216** 0.080 �0.279** �0.099 0.073 �0.102 –P 0.203** 0.100 0.086 0.236** 0.190 0.287** 0.050 �0.028 –R �0.204** �0.031 0.000 �0.062 �0.117 �0.040 0.110 �0.023 0.080 –W 0.350** 0.133 0.161* 0.354** 0.276** 0.346** 0.042 �0.096 0.306** 0.062 –SC �0.241** �0.001 �0.115 �0.144 �0.123 �0.160* 0.092 0.018 �0.123 0.223** �0.182* –

* P < 0.05.** P < 0.01.


was found in the partial sample (age coefficient = �0.131; SE = 0.043, t = �3.068, P < 0.005; agesquared coefficient = �0.0008, SE = 0.003, t = �0.289, P = n.s.).

4. Discussion

Elderly participants reported fewer cognitive failures than younger people. This result was al-ready obtained by Rabbitt and Abson (1990). The negative correlation between age and CFQscores is not high (r was �0.116, �0.086, �0.13 for three different samples in Rabbitt and Abson’swork; �0.177 and �0.234 for our total and partial samples, respectively), but it is statistically sig-nificant. Moreover, the trend is linear: as the age increases, the frequency of self-reported cogni-tive failures decreases. Although we have no data relative to the actual cognitive performance ofthe present sample of elderly participants, we may suppose that the known decrease of perfor-mance due to aging (Craik & Salthouse, 2000; Dixon et al., 2004) should be present in our sampletoo. However, for the present there is not evidence that also the decrease in performance is asmuch linear as self-reported failures (although in the opposite direction). It is worth of noting,for example, that the quadratic term for age was found to be significant in a test of general fluidintelligence assessed in a large sample of aged people: the decline in mean scores accelerates afterthe individual reaches the age of 70 (Rabbitt et al., 2004). Discussing the lack of a positive rela-tionship in elderly people between the self-report data (drawn not only from CFQ but also fromother cognitive self-report questionnaires), on one hand, and objective-test data, on the other,Rabbitt and Abson (1990) stated that self-reports should not be abandoned but have to be con-sidered for what they give as a source of information about the self-representation more than asan index of performance. This issue has notoriously become a fundamental characteristic of


research on aging, not only for methodological reasons but also for an adequate evaluation of theeffects of self-representation on the performance itself (Schwarz, Park, Knauper, & Sudman,1998).

The first interpretation one may give of the counter-intuitive inverse relation between cognitive-lapse report and age is that elderly people fail to record their cognitive failures for different rea-sons: from the lack of interest for their cognitive abilities (once they are no longer interested or areless engaged in cognitively demanding work activities) to a transformation of their metacognitiveabilities devoted to monitoring cognitive processes. Rabbitt and Abson (1990) (see also Nisbett &Wilson, 1977; Rabbitt, 1990; Schwarz et al., 1998) suggested that other factors may concur in gen-erating this phenomenon, especially the general attitude elderly people have toward their new per-sonal and social conditions determined by the retirement at hand or already under way.

Notwithstanding the lack of a consistent evaluation of the status of their cognitive abilities interms of reported cognitive failures, older people stated that it is correct to worry about their ownpsychological conditions, but that at the same time it is necessary to avoid fictitious and excessiveworries. The attitude elderly people have toward their cognitive activity, as it emerges from themetacognitive questionnaires, is thus not related to a self-evaluation of the age-related increaseof cognitive failures. CFQ-scores appeared to be mostly predicted by the Cognitive Confidencescale of MCQ, that is a scale similar to CFQ in the self-recording of cognitive failures. Factorage was the second good predictor, but in the inverse direction one may expect: in fact lowerCFQ-scores were found in elderly participants. Metacognitive worries were more frequent in peo-ple who reported a greater frequency of cognitive failures, independently on the age. These resultsconfirms further the hypothesis that in elderly people there is a kind of paradoxical dissociationbetween the self-report of cognitive abilities and their metacognitive monitoring: although theydeclare to be very worried and careful of their own cognitive processes, it seems that they arenot able to record their own failures. We wonder therefore what the benefit of this cognitive mon-itoring on the actual performance of elderly people is, and in order to answer this question it willbe necessary to verify the relationship between self-evaluation and objective performance in peo-ple with different degrees of metacognitive self-representation.

References

Broadbent, D. E., Broadbent, M. H. P., & Jones, J. L. (1986). Performance correlates of self-reported cognitive failureand obsessionality. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 25, 285–299.

Broadbent, D. E., Cooper, P. J., Fitzgerald, P. F., & Parkes, K. R. (1982). The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ)and its correlates. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 21, 1–16.

Cartwright-Hatton, S., & Wells, A. (1997). Beliefs about worry and intrusions: The meta-cognitions questionnaire andits correlates. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 11, 279–296.

Craik, F. I. M., & Salthouse, T. A. (Eds.). (2000). The handbook of aging and cognition. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum Associates.

Dixon, R., Backman, L., & Nilsson, L.-G. (Eds.). (2004). New frontiers in cognitive aging. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

Houston, D. M. (1989). The relationship between cognitive failure and self-focused attention. British Journal of Clinical

Psychology, 28, 85–86.Klumb, P. L. (1995). Cognitive failures and performance differences: Validation studies of a German version of the

Cognitive Failures Questionnaire. Ergonomics, 38, 1456–1467.


Larson, G. E., Adelrton, D. L., Neideffer, M., & Underhill, E. (1997). Further evidence on dimensionality andcorrelates of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 29–38.

Mahoney, A. M., Dalby, J. T., & King, M. C. (1998). Cognitive failures and stress. Psychological Reports, 82,1432–1434.

Manly, T., Robertson, I. H., Galloway, M., & Hawkins, K. (1999). The absent mind: Further investigations ofsustained attention to response. Neuropsychologia, 37, 661–670.

Martin, M., & Jones, G. V. (1983). Distribution of attention in cognitive failure. Human Learning, 2, 221–226.Matthews, G., Coyle, K., & Craig, A. (1990). Multiple factors of cognitive failures and their relationship with stress

vulnerability. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 12, 49–65.Matthews, G., & Wells, A. (1988). Relationships between anxiety, self-consciousness and cognitive failure. Cognition

and Emotion, 2, 123–132.Mecacci, L., Righi, S., & Rocchetti, G. (2004). Cognitive failures and circadian typology. Personality and Individual

Differences, 37, 107–113.Merckelbach, H., Muris, P., Nijman, H., & de Jing, P. J. (1996). Self-reported cognitive failures and neurotic

symptomatology. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 715–724.Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. De Camp (1977). Telling more than we know: Verbal reports on mental processes.

Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.Rabbitt, P. (1990). Age, IQ, and recall of errors. Ergonomics, 33, 1291–1305.Rabbitt, P., & Abson, V. (1990). Lost and Found: Some logical and methodological limitations of self-report

questionnaires as tools to study cognitive ageing. British Journal of Psychology, 81, 1–16.Rabbitt, P., & Abson, V. (1991). Do older people know how good they are? British Journal of Psychology, 82, 137–151.Rabbitt, P., McInnes, L., Diggle, P., Holland, F., Bent, N., Abson, V., et al. (2004). The University of Manchester

longitudinal study of cognition in normal healthy old age, 1983–2003. Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, 11,245–279.

Robertson, I. H., Manly, T., Andrade, J., Baddeley, B. T., & Yiend, J. (1997). ‘Oops!’: Performance correlates ofeveryday attentional failures in traumatic brain injured and normal subjects. Neuropsychologia, 35, 747–758.

Schwarz, N., Park, D., Knauper, B., & Sudman, S. (Eds.). (1998). Cognition, aging, and self-reports. Hove: PsychologyPress.

Tipper, S. P., & Baylis, G. C. (1987). Individual differences in selective attention: The relation of priming andinterference to cognitive failure. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 667–675.

Wallace, J. C. (2004). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire: Evidence fordimensionality and construct validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 307–324.

Wallace, J. C., Kass, S. J., & Stanny, C. J. (2002). The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire revisited: Dimensions andcorrelates. Journal of General Psychology, 129, 238–256.

Wallace, J. C., Vodanovich, S. J., & Restino, B. M. (2003). Predicting cognitive failures from boredom proneness anddaytime sleepiness scores: An investigation within military and undergraduate samples. Personality and Individual

Differences, 34, 635–644.Wells, A. (2002). Disturbi emozionali e metacognizione. Nuove strategie di psicoterapia cognitiva. Milano, Erickson.Wells, A., & Davies, M. (1994). The thought control questionnaire: A measure of individual differences in the control of

unwanted thoughts. Behavior Research and Therapy, 32, 871–878.

Documents

Cognitive failures, metacognitive beliefs and aging