What to do when feeling bored?

Abstract

The goal of this study was to explore different strategies for coping with boredom. A questionnaire was developed targeting two dimensions of coping, namely approach versus avoidance oriented coping and cognitive versus behavioral oriented coping. First, based on the responses of 976 students (51% female) from grades 5 to 10, the structure of the coping with boredom scales was verified by confirmatory factor analysis. In a second step, 3 different boredom-coping groups were identified by latent profile analysis. These three groups were named Reappraisers, Criticizers, and Evaders. Third, differences between these groups concerning their frequency of experiencing boredom, their academic achievement, and other emotional, motivational, and cognitive aspects of academic achievement situations were analyzed. Relative to the other 2 groups, Reappraisers preferred cognitive-approach strategies, were less frequently bored, and experienced the most positive pattern of emotional, motivational, and cognitive outcomes. Finally, methodological and educational implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Examining boredom: Different causes for different coping profiles

“…Cognitive avoidance and behavioral avoidance strat egies involve cognitive and physical disengagement, respectively, from boring situations. Cognitive approach strategies were negatively relat ed to frequency of boredom and positively associated with value in learning (Nett et al, 2010(Nett et al, , 2011; whereas, both cognitive avoidance and behavioral avoidance coping were positively related to the occur rence of boredom and negatively related to effort in learning.…”

“…The Evader profile was com mon for Chinese students along with two additional coping profiles: In frequent Copers who were low on all coping strategies and Reformers who were high on all strategies except behavioral avoidance. In Nett et al (2010Nett et al ( , 2011 the Reappraiser profile was consistently the most adaptive as evidenced by lower boredom, sustained interest and effort, and higher levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness. In contrast, Reappraisers and Criticizers did not differ in their perceptions of bore dom in Tze, Klassen, Daniels et al's (2013) research and Criticizers actu ally reported significantly more intrinsic motivation than Reappraisers.…”

“…Based on Holahan's framework of coping with stress (Holahan, Moos, & Schaefer, 1996), Nett et al (2010) developed the Boredom Coping Scale (BCS) from a sample of Grades 5 10 German students. The BCS consists of four categories: cognitive approach, behavioral approach, cognitive avoidance, and behavioral avoidance coping.…”

“…Nett et al (2010) used latent profile analysis and identified three groups of students: Reappraisers, Criticizers, and Evaders. Reappraisers primarily endorsed cognitive approach strategies and Criticizers predominantly adopted behavioral approach coping; whereas, Evaders preferred cognitive avoidance and behavioral avoidance strategies.…”

“…The factors contributing to boredom represent variations of control and value appraisals such as a lack of control, choice, challenge, and meaning (e.g., Acee et al, 2010;Kanevsky & Keighley, 2003;. In turn, not all strategies to cope with bore dom are equal and some students cope with boredom better than others (Nett, Goetz, & Daniels, 2010;Nett, Goetz, & Hall, 2011;. Despite recent attention to the causes of boredom and ways to cope with this emotion in separate studies, investigations have not taken into account the relationships between causes of and ways to cope with boredom.…”