1990
DOI: 10.1007/bf00960453
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiple factors of cognitive failure and their relationships with stress vulnerability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

8
56
1
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 93 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
8
56
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present study, the mean OCF score was 28.9 and was similar to Allahyari, Saraji, Adl, et al's findings, which showed that the mean score of the CFQ was 27.9 [14]. The mean OCF score in the present study is lower than the mean cognitive failure reported by Wallace and Vodanovich [12], who measured the cognitive failure in relation to driving accidents (the mean score was 43.4) and Matthews, Coyle and Craig [25], who measured the cognitive error in relation to stress (the mean score was 45.0), but greater than the mean cognitive failure score reported by Larson, Alderton, Neideffer, et al [9].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…In the present study, the mean OCF score was 28.9 and was similar to Allahyari, Saraji, Adl, et al's findings, which showed that the mean score of the CFQ was 27.9 [14]. The mean OCF score in the present study is lower than the mean cognitive failure reported by Wallace and Vodanovich [12], who measured the cognitive failure in relation to driving accidents (the mean score was 43.4) and Matthews, Coyle and Craig [25], who measured the cognitive error in relation to stress (the mean score was 45.0), but greater than the mean cognitive failure score reported by Larson, Alderton, Neideffer, et al [9].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…The literature is replete with inconclusive findings regarding the factor structure of the CFQ (Matthews, Coyle, & Craig, 1990; Pollina, Greene, Tunick, & Puckett, 1992; Wallace, 2004) although the CFQ had been thought to assess a single construct. The developers indicated that the CFQ assesses a single, stable trait-like construct with adequate psychometrics (Broadbent et al, 1982).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, Pollina, Greene, Tunick, and Puckett (1992) suggest that the CFQ consists of five underlying factors, which they describe as distractibility, misdirected actions, spatial/kinaesthetic memory, interpersonal intelligence, and memory for names. Seven and nine-factor solutions have been reported by Matthews, Coyle, and Craig (1990) and a two-factor solution has been reported by Larson et al (1997). The meaning of this bewildering assortment of factors is quite unclear, except that the CFQ would seem to assess a good deal more than attention-related cognitive failures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%