Over two decades ago, the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) was introduced as a tool for obtaining information concerning the frequency of everyday errors. Since then errors have been related to the construct of error proneness, which is supposed to be a steady trait in any individual. The CFQ has been adapted for populations other than English speakers and used in a great variety of experimental and applied settings. The aim of this paper is twofold: 1) to further address the factorial structure of the CFQ, and 2) to verify the predictive validity of the error proneness construct in a simulated driving task. Results of the first study showed that seven factors might underlie the CFQ structure: Action monitoring and control, Memory for names, Decision, Mind-wandering, Over-reliance on memory, Blunders, Absent-mindedness. However, we show that the CFQ total score may be preferred. Furthermore, the experimental study here reported showed that the CFQ total score is a weak predictor of driving performance and only predicts the time spent out-of-path, suggesting that error proneness, as measured by this questionnaire, is mainly linked to constructs such as absent mindedness or distractibility rather than a dispositional tendency to make errors.

IS ERROR PRONENESS SPECIFIC TO ERRORS? PREDICTIVE VALIDITY OF THE COGNITIVE FAILURES QUESTIONNAIRE

D'OLIMPIO, Francesca
2014

Abstract

Over two decades ago, the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) was introduced as a tool for obtaining information concerning the frequency of everyday errors. Since then errors have been related to the construct of error proneness, which is supposed to be a steady trait in any individual. The CFQ has been adapted for populations other than English speakers and used in a great variety of experimental and applied settings. The aim of this paper is twofold: 1) to further address the factorial structure of the CFQ, and 2) to verify the predictive validity of the error proneness construct in a simulated driving task. Results of the first study showed that seven factors might underlie the CFQ structure: Action monitoring and control, Memory for names, Decision, Mind-wandering, Over-reliance on memory, Blunders, Absent-mindedness. However, we show that the CFQ total score may be preferred. Furthermore, the experimental study here reported showed that the CFQ total score is a weak predictor of driving performance and only predicts the time spent out-of-path, suggesting that error proneness, as measured by this questionnaire, is mainly linked to constructs such as absent mindedness or distractibility rather than a dispositional tendency to make errors.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11591/192897
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact