Examining the factor structure of the Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire

被引:9
|
作者
Shaikh, Komal T. [1 ,2 ]
Tatham, Erica L. [1 ,2 ]
Rich, Jill B. [1 ,2 ]
Troyer, Angela K. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] York Univ, Dept Psychol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Baycrest Hlth Sci, Neuropsychol & Cognit Hlth Program, 3560 Bathurst St, Toronto, ON M6A 2E1, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Dept Psychol, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
Validity; metamemory; confirmatory factor analysis; subjective memory; measurement properties; PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES;
D O I
10.1080/09658211.2021.1874995
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Many adults report memory changes as they age. The Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire (MMQ) measures different aspects of self-reported memory, including satisfaction with one's memory, self-appraisal of memory ability, and compensatory strategy use. This questionnaire has been extensively used for clinical and research purposes, with studies reporting differences in the factor structure (three or four factors) underlying this measure. The current study evaluates previously reported factor configurations of the MMQ using best measurement practices. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on data from 560 cognitively - normal adults, ranging in age from 50 to 90 years old. Our results demonstrate support for both 3-factor model (with Satisfaction, Ability and Strategy scales) and 4-factor model structure (with Satisfaction, Ability, Internal Strategy and External Strategy scales) of this instrument. These results harmonise the existing literature which, in separate studies using exploratory analyses, supports the validity of one model or the other. The confirmation of multiple Strategy scales will provide clinicians and researchers with additional relevant information about how older adults compensate for their memory changes, enabling a broader understanding of the experience of age-related memory change. We contextualise these results within existing research identifying conceptual differences between internal and external strategy implementation.
引用
收藏
页码:255 / 260
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The multifactorial structure of theory of mind: A confirmatory factor analysis study
    Cashion, L
    Dryer, R
    Kiernan, M
    AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 57 : 191 - 191
  • [32] Factor structure of the awareness questionnaire.
    Sherer, M
    Bergloff, P
    Boake, C
    Levin, E
    High, W
    Gollaher, K
    ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 12 (04) : 403 - 404
  • [33] FACTOR STRUCTURE OF THE PRESCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS QUESTIONNAIRE
    FINEGAN, JA
    NICCOLS, A
    ZACHER, J
    HOOD, J
    INFANT BEHAVIOR & DEVELOPMENT, 1989, 12 (02): : 221 - 227
  • [34] THE FACTOR STRUCTURE OF THE COPING STRATEGIES QUESTIONNAIRE
    SWARTZMAN, LC
    GWADRY, FG
    SHAPIRO, AP
    TEASELL, RW
    PAIN, 1994, 57 (03) : 311 - 316
  • [35] THE FACTOR STRUCTURE OF THE RECKLESS BEHAVIOR QUESTIONNAIRE
    SHAW, DS
    WAGNER, EF
    ARNETT, J
    ABER, MS
    JOURNAL OF YOUTH AND ADOLESCENCE, 1992, 21 (03) : 305 - 323
  • [36] Factor structure of the Prenatal Distress Questionnaire
    Alderdice, Fiona
    Lynn, Fiona
    MIDWIFERY, 2011, 27 (04) : 553 - 559
  • [37] The factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
    Mellor, David
    Stokes, Mark
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2007, 23 (02) : 105 - 112
  • [38] Factor structure of the Cybersex Motives Questionnaire
    Franc, Elisabeth
    Khazaal, Yasser
    Jasiowka, Katarzyna
    Lepers, Thibault
    Bianchi-Demicheli, Francesco
    Rothen, Stephane
    JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL ADDICTIONS, 2018, 7 (03) : 601 - 609
  • [39] Factor Structure of the Chinese Virtues Questionnaire
    Duan, Wenjie
    Ho, Samuel M. Y.
    Yu, Bai
    Tang, Xiaoqing
    Zhang, Yonghong
    Li, Tingting
    Yuen, Tom
    RESEARCH ON SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE, 2012, 22 (06) : 680 - 688
  • [40] Examining the Factor Structure and Etiology of Prosociality
    Mikolajewski, Amy J.
    Chavarria, Jesus
    Moltisanti, Allison
    Hart, Sara A.
    Taylor, Jeanette
    PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2014, 26 (04) : 1259 - 1267