- Email: [email protected]
Incremental variance in indecisiveness due to cognitive failure compared to fluid intelligence and personality traits
Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Incremental variance in indecisiveness due to cognitive failure compared to fluid intelligence and personality traits Annamaria Di Fabio ⇑, Letizia Palazzeschi Department of Psychology, University of Florence, Italy
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 2 June 2012 Received in revised form 8 September 2012 Accepted 10 September 2012 Available online 9 October 2012 Keywords: Fluid intelligence Personality traits Perceived cognitive failure Indecisiveness
a b s t r a c t This study investigated the role of fluid intelligence, personality traits and perceived cognitive failure in relation to indecisiveness. The Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM), the Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) and the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) were administered to 429 Italian high school students. The study revealed that perceived cognitive failure added a significant percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness compared to variances due to fluid intelligence and personality traits thereby offering new research and intervention possibilities. Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The indecisiveness construct, which is defined as the inability to make decisions in a timely manner in different situations and domains of life, has been the focus of numerous studies (Ferrari, Johnson, & McCown, 1995). Several authors have analyzed the definition of the indecisiveness construct in an attempt to clarify the difference between indecisiveness and indecision. Indecisiveness refers to a chronic inability to make decisions in various contexts (Frost & Shows, 1993) whereas indecision is a construct that refers to the emergence of problems during the career decision-making process (Osipow, 1999). The principal definitions are summarized in Table 1. Many studies have revealed a link between the indecisiveness construct and variables such as lack of self-esteem (Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ferrari, 1991; Ferrari, McCown, & Johnson, 1989), procrastination (Beswick, Rothblum, & Mann, 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), obsessive compulsive tendencies (Frost & Shows, 1993; Gayton, Clavin, Clavin, & Broida, 1994), perfectionism (Frost & Shows, 1993; Gayton et al., 1994) and distractibility (Harriott, Ferrari, & Dovidio, 1996). Other studies have found that individuals with high levels of indecisiveness take more time than individuals with lower levels of indecisiveness in choosing between alternatives (Frost & Shows, 1993), that they use less exhaustive strategies in reaching ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Dipartimento Di Psicologia, Università degli Studi di Firenze, via di San Salvi, 12, Complesso di San Salvi, Padiglione 26, 50135 Firenze, Italy. Tel.: +39 (0) 55 2055850; fax: +39 (0) 55 6236047. E-mail address: [email protected]fi.it (A. Di Fabio). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.09.005
decisions (Ferrari & Dovidio, 2000, 2001), that they exert greater cognitive effort in decision making (Ferrari & Dovidio, 2001), that they feel more threatened by ambiguous situations (Rassin & Muris, 2005a) and that they are more likely to postpone decision making (Rassin & Muris, 2005b; Veinott, 2002). Yet other studies have found that indecisive individuals have greater difficulty in choosing specialized college subjects (Gayton et al., 1994) and in making other important life decisions (Frost & Shows, 1993; Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002). Decision making is a complex process in which different variables play a role: individual variables (Nilsson et al., 2007); situational variables related to decisional problems (Campbell & Cellini, 1981); and contextual variables (Constantine, Wallace, & Kindaichi, 2005). Literature analysis reveals a growing interest in the study of the individual variables in decision-making processes (Nilsson et al., 2007). For example, in the literature, indecisiveness is often traditionally linked to personality traits and, in particular, to Neuroticism (Diab, Gillespie, & Highhouse, 2008; Jackson, Furnham, & Lawty-Jones, 1999). Recent studies (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011) confirm that, among personality traits, Neuroticism is most closely linked to indecisiveness. Another recent study (Di Fabio, Palazzeschi, Asulin-Peretz, & Gati, in press) suggests that personality traits play a greater role in explaining indecisiveness than do emotional intelligence, perceived social support and career decision-making self-efficacy. However, on the other hand, emotional intelligence plays a greater role in explaining indecision than do personality traits, perceived social support and career decision-making self-efficacy. The relationship between personality traits and indecisiveness has been studied in detail in the literature, emphasizing the role
262
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
Table 1 Definitions of indecisiveness and indecision constructs.
Crites (1969) Osipow (1999)
Germeijs and de Boeck (2002) Savickas (2004)
Indecisiveness
Indecision
Indecisive subjects are individuals who seem to have difficulty in taking any kind of decision, regardless of its importance. Chronic or generalized indecisiveness as a personal characteristic manifesting in an individual’s difficulty in taking decisions in any part of his or her own life. Indecisiveness implies a chronic inability to make decisions in all decisional contexts. Indecisive individuals as people characterized by chronic anxiety and a lack of problem-solving skills.
Undecided subjects are individuals who seem to have difficulty in taking decisions particularly in a professional context. Developmental indecision as part of a normal developmental stage of life.
of Neuroticism (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Di Fabio et al., in press; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011); yet relatively few studies have investigated the possible role of cognitive factors – and in particular the role of perceived cognitive factors – in indecisiveness, although cognitive factors have traditionally been linked to decision making. Early research on decision making was dominated by normative models and probabilistic studies strongly influenced by economic theory (Luce & Raiffa, 1957) where the emphasis was on the cognitive aspects of decision making. Regarding the specific role of fluid intelligence in decision-making processes, a study by Rigas, Carling, and Brehmer (2002) revealed that greater fluid intelligence was linked to better performance in dynamic decision-making tasks. A recent study by Di Fabio and Palazzeschi (2012) revealed an inverse relationship between indecisiveness and fluid intelligence, but, at the same time, it also revealed inverse relationships between indecisiveness and personality traits and, in particular, between indecisiveness and the core self-evaluation construct. The literature has pointed to a relationship between perceived cognitive failure and decision-making weakness as manifested in the procrastination decisional style (Di Fabio, 2006). The major aim or contribution of the present study was to determine empirically if perceived cognitive failure could also play a greater role in indecisiveness than that played by personality traits (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, in press; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011). Cognitive failure includes neglectfulness, loss of memorized information, distractibility and lack of ideas (Broadbent, Cooper, Fitzgerald, & Parkes, 1982). Regarding decisional procrastination, the analysis of implicit cognitive processes offers interesting prospects for in-depth study (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). Some researchers see decisional procrastination as an expression of cognitive failure and, therefore, as a manifestation of a delay in evaluating information about alternative choices due to poor acquisition, retention and processing of complex information (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). Studies carried out with Italian high school students (Di Fabio, 2006; Di Fabio & Busoni, 2006) have shown that decisional procrastination can be explained largely in terms of perceived cognitive failure. Given the relationship between decisional procrastination and indecisiveness (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), it could be argued that perceived cognitive failure also plays a role in indecisiveness – an argument warranting further empirical study.
Indecision involves decisional problems only in a specific context. Undecided individuals are people characterized by a temporary inability to choose, but potentially able to take decisions depending on their level of development.
of perceived cognitive failure (Di Fabio, 2006; Di Fabio & Busoni, 2006), the present study sought to examine the relationship between fluid intelligence, personality traits, perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness among students in the last year of high school. The aim was to determine whether perceived cognitive failure could explain a percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence and personality traits. School students were chosen as research subjects because of the perceived need to study this topic in a scholastic context, specifically among students having to contend with significant choices and transition at the end of high school. The following hypotheses were accordingly made. (H1) Personality traits (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability – low Neuroticism, and Openness) according to the Big Five Model (Costa & McCrae, 1992) will account for significant incremental variance in indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011). (H2) Perceived cognitive failure will account for significant incremental variance in indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence and personality traits (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994) and will show a positive relationship with indecisiveness. 2. Material and methods 2.1. Participants and procedure Four hundred and twenty-nine students attending the last two years of high school in the Tuscan school system participated in the study. All the students enrolled in the last year of high school in the school system were invited to participate. With regard to gender, 202 (47.09%) of the participants were boys and 227 (52.91%) were girls. With regard to the type of school attended, 196 (45.69%) of the students attended a technical school and 233 (54.31%) attended a college preparatory high school. The participants ranged in age from 17 to 22 years (M = 18.41, SD = .81). The instruments were administered collectively in each classroom in the school by specially trained staff at a time agreed upon with the school and with due adherence to the requirements of privacy and informed consent. 2.2. Measures
1.1. Aim and hypotheses Based on the findings of previous studies, particularly those that indicated a link between indecisiveness and personality traits, especially Neuroticism (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011), and between indecisiveness and procrastination (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), which can be explained largely in terms
2.2.1. Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) The Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) (Raven, 1962) in the Italian version by Di Fabio and Clarotti (2007) was used to evaluate fluid intelligence. The test is subdivided into two series of items consisting respectively of 12 (Series I) items and 36 (Series II) items from which the participants had to choose one response from among eight possible alternatives. The first series was used for
263
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
at the first step, personality traits at the second step and perceived cognitive failure at the third step. Fluid intelligence accounted for the 2% variance in indecisiveness. When personality traits were added at the second step, the regression model was significant (F = 24.67, p < .001) and accounted for the 24% greater variance; when perceived cognitive failure was added at the third step, the regression model was significant (F = 26.38, p < .001) and accounted for the 10% greater variance. A positive relationship emerged between perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness (b = .22, p < .001).
practice purposes, and the second series was used as an efficiency test. With regard to the reliability of the Italian normative sample, the Cronbach’s alpha was .91. 2.2.2. Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) The Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) (Caprara, Barbaranelli, & Borgogni, 1993) was used to evaluate personality traits. The questionnaire has 132 items consisting of response options in a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from 1 = Absolutely false to 5 = Absolutely true. The questionnaire distinguishes five fundamental personality dimensions. In the Italian normative sample, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .81 for Extraversion (example item ‘‘I think I am an active and vigorous person’’), .73 for Agreeableness (example item ‘‘I understand when people need my help’’), .81 for Conscientiousness (example item ‘‘I carry out the decisions I make’’), .90 for Emotional Stability (example item ‘‘I usually do not react in an exaggerated way even when faced with strong emotions’’) and .75 for Openness (example item ‘‘Each new thing fascinates me’’).
4. Discussion and conclusions The aim of the present study was to determine whether perceived cognitive failure would demonstrate incremental variance in explaining indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence and personality traits among Italian high school students. The results of the study confirmed the first hypothesis as personality traits accounted for a greater percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness than did fluid intelligence. Regarding individual variables, and in accordance with literature findings (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Di Fabio et al., in press; Diab et al., 2008; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011; Jackson et al., 1999), the results of the study confirmed the role of personality traits and, in particular, of Neuroticism (low Emotional Stability) in indecisiveness. This finding supports Savickas (2004) claim that chronic indecisiveness is associated with difficulties in managing anxiety. The results of the study also confirmed the second hypothesis as perceived cognitive failure explained a greater significant percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness than did fluid intelligence and personality traits. These results thus also underlined the role in indecisiveness of cognitive factors and, in particular, perceived cognitive failure, including neglectfulness, loss of memorized information, distractibility and lack of ideas (Broadbent et al., 1982). The different aspects of cognitive failure can help explain indecisiveness: neglectfulness could result in people not attaching importance to making decisions or to making them unthinkingly; loss of memorized information could impede the decision-making process because people do not have the necessary information to make decisions; distractibility could draw people’s attention away from making decisions; lack of ideas could impede people from making decisions because of their inability to discern alternative decisions (Broadbent et al., 1982). In the literature on maladaptive style procrastination, the analysis of implicit cognitive processes is a topic that offers interesting prospects for in-depth study (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). A particularly interesting view is that decisional procrastination is related to cognitive failure and that, therefore, it is a manifestation of a delay in processing and evaluating information about
2.2.3. Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) (Broadbent et al., 1982) in the Italian version by Di Fabio and Palazzeschi , (in press) was used to evaluate perceived cognitive failure. The questionnaire has 25 items consisting of response options in a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from 0 = Never to 4 = Very often. The reliability coefficient of the Italian version of the scale was good: a = .81 (Di Fabio and Palazzeschi, in press; Di Fabio, Giannini, & Martelli, 2004). Example items: ‘‘Do you read something and find you haven’t been thinking about it and must read it again?’’ and ‘‘Do you find you forget appointments?’’ 2.2.4. Indecisiveness Scale (IS) The Indecisiveness Scale (IS) (Frost & Shows, 1993) in the Italian version by Di Fabio, Busoni, and Palazzeschi (2011) was used to evaluate indecisiveness. The scale (15 items) measures indecisiveness using a 5-point Likert scale that ranges from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree. The Italian version of the scale possessed good internal coherence (a = .85). Example items: ‘‘When ordering from a menu, I usually find it difficult to decide what to get’’ and ‘‘It seems that deciding on the most trivial thing takes me a long time’’. 3. Results Means and standard deviations for the APM, BFQ, CFQ and the IS as well as the correlations between these variables are reported in Table 2. Table 3 shows the results of the hierarchical regression with indecisiveness as the criterion measure and with fluid intelligence
Table 2 Means, standard deviations and correlations relative to APM, BFQ, CFQ, IS.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
APM – fluid intelligence Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Emotional stability Openness CFQ – perceived cognitive failure IS indecisiveness
Note: N = 429. * p < .05. ** p < .01.
M
SD
19.47 74.24 73.48 77.12 61.60 75.30 44.78 40.78
6.99 15.65 12.36 16.24 15.99 16.34 13.61 9.70
1
2 .05 .03 .02 .07 .04 .21** .12*
3
.46** .51** .50** .47** .15* .26**
4
.50** .37** .51** .08 .11*
5
.48** .52** .09 .07
6
.52** .27** .35**
7
.08 .10*
.39**
8
264
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
Table 3 Hierarchical regression. The contributions of fluid intelligence, personality traits and perceived cognitive failure to indecisiveness (N = 429). Indecisiveness b Step 1 APM – fluid intelligence
.12*
Step 2 Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Emotional Stability Openness
.33*** .28*** .17** .36*** .07
Step 3 CFQ – perceived cognitive failure
.22***
2
R step 1 DR2 step 2 DR2 step 3 R2 total * ** ***
.02* .24*** .10*** .36***
p < .05. p < .01. p < .001.
alternative choices (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). In the literature, decisional procrastination is also linked to indecisiveness (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994) and, consequently, in the present study it was assumed that cognitive failure could play a role in indecisiveness. The study results confirmed this assumption since indecisiveness was also linked to perceived cognitive failure thus underlining the role of perceived cognitive factors and not only personality traits in explaining indecisiveness. Although the results of the study appear promising as they underline the role of perceived cognitive factors in indecisiveness, some limitations need to be pointed out, for example the impossibility of generalizing the results beyond the specific sample of Italian students used in the study. Future research should use samples that are more widely representative of the Italian population, and the results of other international studies should be studied and compared. Notwithstanding its limitations, the present study highlighted the relationship between fluid intelligence, personality traits and perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness. The study results call for further investigation of the relationship between perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness thereby opening up new areas for future research and intervention. Future research could investigate the role of the different aspects of perceived cognitive failure in indecisiveness, for example the three areas identified by Broadbent et al. (1982): the area of perception, the area of memory and the area of motor control. Such a study could determine whether certain aspects of perceived cognitive failure play a greater role than others in indecisiveness. Analysis of the role of perceived cognitive failure could also be extended to other decision-making difficulties such as those experienced in deciding on a career. Further confirmation of the results will highlight the importance of appropriate interventions for reducing perceptions of cognitive failure (as a primary prevention intervention); the importance of screening interventions for early specific training in perceived cognitive failure (as a secondary prevention intervention); and, finally, the importance of intervention in crisis situations involving perceived cognitive failure (as a tertiary prevention intervention). The findings also call for reflection on the implications for indecisiveness of cognitive failure, that is, poor attention span, loss of memorized information, distractibility and lack of ideas. Such reflection may prove to be of significance for future studies and new forms of intervention in terms of both prevention and recovery.
References Beswick, G., Rothblum, E. D., & Mann, L. (1988). Psychological antecedents to student procrastination. Australian Psychologist, 23, 207–217. Broadbent, D. E., Cooper, P. F., Fitzgerald, P., & Parkes, K. R. (1982). The cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 21, 1–16. Burka, J. B., & Yuen, L. M. (1983). Procrastination: Why do you do it and what to do about it. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley. Campbell, R. E., & Cellini, J. V. (1981). A diagnostic taxonomy of adult career problems. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 19, 175–190. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Borgogni, L. (1993). BFQ: Big five questionnaire (2nd ed.). Firenze: Giunti O.S. Constantine, M. G., Wallace, B. C., & Kindaichi, M. M. (2005). Examining contextual factors in the career decision status of African American adolescents. Journal of Career Assessment, 13, 307–319. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Crites, J. O. (1969). Vocational psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill. Diab, D. L., Gillespie, M. A., & Highhouse, S. (2008). Are maximizers really unhappy? The measurement of maximizing tendency. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 364–370. Di Fabio, A. (2006). Decisional procrastination correlates: Personality traits, selfesteem or perception of cognitive failure? International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 6(2), 109–122. Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (in press). Il Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ): Un contributo alla validazione italiana [The cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ): A contribution to Italian validation]. Counseling: Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni. Di Fabio, A., & Busoni, L. (2006). Covariation des styles décisionnels: Perception d’échec cognitif, estime de soi ou traits de personnalité? [Correlates of decisional styles: Perception of cognitive failure, self-esteem or personality traits?]. L’Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle, 35(3), 363–385. Di Fabio, A., Busoni, L., & Palazzeschi, L. (2011). Indecisiveness Scale (IS): Proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana [indecisiveness scale (IS): Psychometric properties of the Italian version]. Counseling: Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 4, 13–24. Di Fabio, A., & Clarotti, S. (2007). Matrici progressive di Raven Adattamento Italiano [Raven progressive matrices. The Italian adaptation]. Firenze: Giunti O.S.. Di Fabio, A., Giannini, M., & Martelli, M. (2004). Il Cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ): Proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana [Cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ): Psychometric properties of the Italian version]. Risorsa Uomo. Rivista di Psicologia del Lavoro e dell’Organizzazione, 10, 101–112. Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (2012). Incremental variance of the core selfevaluation construct compared to fluid intelligence and personality traits in aspects of decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 196–201. Di Fabio, A., Palazzeschi, L., Asulin-Peretz, L., & Gati, I. (in press). Career indecision versus indecisiveness: Associations with personality traits and emotional intelligence. Journal of Career Assessment. Effert, B., & Ferrari, J. R. (1989). Decisional procrastination: Examining personality correlates. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 151–156. Ferrari, J. R. (1991). Compulsive procrastination: Some self-reported characteristics. Psychological Reports, 68, 455–458. Ferrari, J. R. (1992). Psychometric validation of two procrastination inventories: Arousal and avoidance measures. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 14, 97–110. Ferrari, J. R. (2000). Procrastination and attention: Factor analysis of attention deficit, boredomness, intelligence, self-esteem and task delay frequencies. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 185–196. Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Information search processes by indecisives: Individual differences in decisional procrastination. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 127–137. Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2001). Behavioral information search processes by indecisives. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 1113–1123. Ferrari, J. R., & Emmons, R. A. (1994). Procrastination and revenge: Do people report using delays as a strategy for vengeance? Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 539–544. Ferrari, J. R., Johnson, J. L., & McCown, W. G. (1995). Procrastination and Task Avoidance. New York: Plenum. Ferrari, J. R., McCown, W., & Johnson, J. (1989). Validation of an adult inventory of procrastination. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology: Villanova University. Frost, R. O., & Shows, D. L. (1993). The nature and measurement of compulsive indecisiveness. Behavior Research Therapy, 31, 683–692. Gayton, W. F., Clavin, R. H., Clavin, S. L., & Broida, J. (1994). Further validation of the indecisiveness scale. Psychological Reports, 75, 1631–1634. Germeijs, V., & De Boeck, P. (2002). A measurement scale for indecisiveness and its relationship to career indecision and other types of indecision. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 113–122. Germeijs, V., & Verschueren, K. (2011). Indecisiveness and big five personality factors: Relationship and specificity. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 1023–1028. Harriott, J. S., Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (1996). Distractibility, daydreaming, and self-critical cognitions as determinants of indecision. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 337–344.
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265 Jackson, C. J., Furnham, A., & Lawty-Jones, M. (1999). Relationship between indecisiveness and neuroticism: The moderating effect of a tough-minded culture. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 789–800. Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley. Nilsson, J. E., Flores, L. Y., Berkel, L. V., Schale, C. L., Linnemeyer, R. M., & Summer, I. (2007). International career articles: A content analysis of four journals across 34 years. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 602–613. Osipow, S. H. (1999). Assessing career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 147–154. Rassin, E., & Muris, P. (2005a). Indecisiveness and the interpretation of ambiguous situations. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1285–1291.
265
Rassin, E., & Muris, P. (2005b). To be or not to be. . .indecisive: Gender differences, correlations with obsessive-compulsive complaints, and behavioural manifestation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1175–1181. Raven, J. C. (1962). Advanced progressive matrices. Firenze: Organizzazioni Speciali. Rigas, G., Carling, E., & Brehmer, B. (2002). Reliability and validity of performance measures in microworlds. Intelligence, 30, 463–480. Savickas, M. (2004). Vocational psychology. In C. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied psychology (pp. 655–667). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. Veinott, E. S. (2002). The effect of understanding and anticipated regret on decision readiness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Michigan.
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Incremental variance in indecisiveness due to cognitive failure compared to fluid intelligence and personality traits Annamaria Di Fabio ⇑, Letizia Palazzeschi Department of Psychology, University of Florence, Italy
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 2 June 2012 Received in revised form 8 September 2012 Accepted 10 September 2012 Available online 9 October 2012 Keywords: Fluid intelligence Personality traits Perceived cognitive failure Indecisiveness
a b s t r a c t This study investigated the role of fluid intelligence, personality traits and perceived cognitive failure in relation to indecisiveness. The Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM), the Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) and the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) were administered to 429 Italian high school students. The study revealed that perceived cognitive failure added a significant percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness compared to variances due to fluid intelligence and personality traits thereby offering new research and intervention possibilities. Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The indecisiveness construct, which is defined as the inability to make decisions in a timely manner in different situations and domains of life, has been the focus of numerous studies (Ferrari, Johnson, & McCown, 1995). Several authors have analyzed the definition of the indecisiveness construct in an attempt to clarify the difference between indecisiveness and indecision. Indecisiveness refers to a chronic inability to make decisions in various contexts (Frost & Shows, 1993) whereas indecision is a construct that refers to the emergence of problems during the career decision-making process (Osipow, 1999). The principal definitions are summarized in Table 1. Many studies have revealed a link between the indecisiveness construct and variables such as lack of self-esteem (Burka & Yuen, 1983; Ferrari, 1991; Ferrari, McCown, & Johnson, 1989), procrastination (Beswick, Rothblum, & Mann, 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), obsessive compulsive tendencies (Frost & Shows, 1993; Gayton, Clavin, Clavin, & Broida, 1994), perfectionism (Frost & Shows, 1993; Gayton et al., 1994) and distractibility (Harriott, Ferrari, & Dovidio, 1996). Other studies have found that individuals with high levels of indecisiveness take more time than individuals with lower levels of indecisiveness in choosing between alternatives (Frost & Shows, 1993), that they use less exhaustive strategies in reaching ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Dipartimento Di Psicologia, Università degli Studi di Firenze, via di San Salvi, 12, Complesso di San Salvi, Padiglione 26, 50135 Firenze, Italy. Tel.: +39 (0) 55 2055850; fax: +39 (0) 55 6236047. E-mail address: [email protected]fi.it (A. Di Fabio). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.09.005
decisions (Ferrari & Dovidio, 2000, 2001), that they exert greater cognitive effort in decision making (Ferrari & Dovidio, 2001), that they feel more threatened by ambiguous situations (Rassin & Muris, 2005a) and that they are more likely to postpone decision making (Rassin & Muris, 2005b; Veinott, 2002). Yet other studies have found that indecisive individuals have greater difficulty in choosing specialized college subjects (Gayton et al., 1994) and in making other important life decisions (Frost & Shows, 1993; Germeijs & De Boeck, 2002). Decision making is a complex process in which different variables play a role: individual variables (Nilsson et al., 2007); situational variables related to decisional problems (Campbell & Cellini, 1981); and contextual variables (Constantine, Wallace, & Kindaichi, 2005). Literature analysis reveals a growing interest in the study of the individual variables in decision-making processes (Nilsson et al., 2007). For example, in the literature, indecisiveness is often traditionally linked to personality traits and, in particular, to Neuroticism (Diab, Gillespie, & Highhouse, 2008; Jackson, Furnham, & Lawty-Jones, 1999). Recent studies (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011) confirm that, among personality traits, Neuroticism is most closely linked to indecisiveness. Another recent study (Di Fabio, Palazzeschi, Asulin-Peretz, & Gati, in press) suggests that personality traits play a greater role in explaining indecisiveness than do emotional intelligence, perceived social support and career decision-making self-efficacy. However, on the other hand, emotional intelligence plays a greater role in explaining indecision than do personality traits, perceived social support and career decision-making self-efficacy. The relationship between personality traits and indecisiveness has been studied in detail in the literature, emphasizing the role
262
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
Table 1 Definitions of indecisiveness and indecision constructs.
Crites (1969) Osipow (1999)
Germeijs and de Boeck (2002) Savickas (2004)
Indecisiveness
Indecision
Indecisive subjects are individuals who seem to have difficulty in taking any kind of decision, regardless of its importance. Chronic or generalized indecisiveness as a personal characteristic manifesting in an individual’s difficulty in taking decisions in any part of his or her own life. Indecisiveness implies a chronic inability to make decisions in all decisional contexts. Indecisive individuals as people characterized by chronic anxiety and a lack of problem-solving skills.
Undecided subjects are individuals who seem to have difficulty in taking decisions particularly in a professional context. Developmental indecision as part of a normal developmental stage of life.
of Neuroticism (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Di Fabio et al., in press; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011); yet relatively few studies have investigated the possible role of cognitive factors – and in particular the role of perceived cognitive factors – in indecisiveness, although cognitive factors have traditionally been linked to decision making. Early research on decision making was dominated by normative models and probabilistic studies strongly influenced by economic theory (Luce & Raiffa, 1957) where the emphasis was on the cognitive aspects of decision making. Regarding the specific role of fluid intelligence in decision-making processes, a study by Rigas, Carling, and Brehmer (2002) revealed that greater fluid intelligence was linked to better performance in dynamic decision-making tasks. A recent study by Di Fabio and Palazzeschi (2012) revealed an inverse relationship between indecisiveness and fluid intelligence, but, at the same time, it also revealed inverse relationships between indecisiveness and personality traits and, in particular, between indecisiveness and the core self-evaluation construct. The literature has pointed to a relationship between perceived cognitive failure and decision-making weakness as manifested in the procrastination decisional style (Di Fabio, 2006). The major aim or contribution of the present study was to determine empirically if perceived cognitive failure could also play a greater role in indecisiveness than that played by personality traits (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, in press; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011). Cognitive failure includes neglectfulness, loss of memorized information, distractibility and lack of ideas (Broadbent, Cooper, Fitzgerald, & Parkes, 1982). Regarding decisional procrastination, the analysis of implicit cognitive processes offers interesting prospects for in-depth study (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). Some researchers see decisional procrastination as an expression of cognitive failure and, therefore, as a manifestation of a delay in evaluating information about alternative choices due to poor acquisition, retention and processing of complex information (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). Studies carried out with Italian high school students (Di Fabio, 2006; Di Fabio & Busoni, 2006) have shown that decisional procrastination can be explained largely in terms of perceived cognitive failure. Given the relationship between decisional procrastination and indecisiveness (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), it could be argued that perceived cognitive failure also plays a role in indecisiveness – an argument warranting further empirical study.
Indecision involves decisional problems only in a specific context. Undecided individuals are people characterized by a temporary inability to choose, but potentially able to take decisions depending on their level of development.
of perceived cognitive failure (Di Fabio, 2006; Di Fabio & Busoni, 2006), the present study sought to examine the relationship between fluid intelligence, personality traits, perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness among students in the last year of high school. The aim was to determine whether perceived cognitive failure could explain a percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence and personality traits. School students were chosen as research subjects because of the perceived need to study this topic in a scholastic context, specifically among students having to contend with significant choices and transition at the end of high school. The following hypotheses were accordingly made. (H1) Personality traits (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability – low Neuroticism, and Openness) according to the Big Five Model (Costa & McCrae, 1992) will account for significant incremental variance in indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011). (H2) Perceived cognitive failure will account for significant incremental variance in indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence and personality traits (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994) and will show a positive relationship with indecisiveness. 2. Material and methods 2.1. Participants and procedure Four hundred and twenty-nine students attending the last two years of high school in the Tuscan school system participated in the study. All the students enrolled in the last year of high school in the school system were invited to participate. With regard to gender, 202 (47.09%) of the participants were boys and 227 (52.91%) were girls. With regard to the type of school attended, 196 (45.69%) of the students attended a technical school and 233 (54.31%) attended a college preparatory high school. The participants ranged in age from 17 to 22 years (M = 18.41, SD = .81). The instruments were administered collectively in each classroom in the school by specially trained staff at a time agreed upon with the school and with due adherence to the requirements of privacy and informed consent. 2.2. Measures
1.1. Aim and hypotheses Based on the findings of previous studies, particularly those that indicated a link between indecisiveness and personality traits, especially Neuroticism (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011), and between indecisiveness and procrastination (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994), which can be explained largely in terms
2.2.1. Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) The Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) (Raven, 1962) in the Italian version by Di Fabio and Clarotti (2007) was used to evaluate fluid intelligence. The test is subdivided into two series of items consisting respectively of 12 (Series I) items and 36 (Series II) items from which the participants had to choose one response from among eight possible alternatives. The first series was used for
263
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
at the first step, personality traits at the second step and perceived cognitive failure at the third step. Fluid intelligence accounted for the 2% variance in indecisiveness. When personality traits were added at the second step, the regression model was significant (F = 24.67, p < .001) and accounted for the 24% greater variance; when perceived cognitive failure was added at the third step, the regression model was significant (F = 26.38, p < .001) and accounted for the 10% greater variance. A positive relationship emerged between perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness (b = .22, p < .001).
practice purposes, and the second series was used as an efficiency test. With regard to the reliability of the Italian normative sample, the Cronbach’s alpha was .91. 2.2.2. Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) The Big Five Questionnaire (BFQ) (Caprara, Barbaranelli, & Borgogni, 1993) was used to evaluate personality traits. The questionnaire has 132 items consisting of response options in a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from 1 = Absolutely false to 5 = Absolutely true. The questionnaire distinguishes five fundamental personality dimensions. In the Italian normative sample, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .81 for Extraversion (example item ‘‘I think I am an active and vigorous person’’), .73 for Agreeableness (example item ‘‘I understand when people need my help’’), .81 for Conscientiousness (example item ‘‘I carry out the decisions I make’’), .90 for Emotional Stability (example item ‘‘I usually do not react in an exaggerated way even when faced with strong emotions’’) and .75 for Openness (example item ‘‘Each new thing fascinates me’’).
4. Discussion and conclusions The aim of the present study was to determine whether perceived cognitive failure would demonstrate incremental variance in explaining indecisiveness beyond the variance accounted for by fluid intelligence and personality traits among Italian high school students. The results of the study confirmed the first hypothesis as personality traits accounted for a greater percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness than did fluid intelligence. Regarding individual variables, and in accordance with literature findings (Di Fabio & Palazzeschi, 2012; Di Fabio et al., in press; Diab et al., 2008; Germeijs & Verschueren, 2011; Jackson et al., 1999), the results of the study confirmed the role of personality traits and, in particular, of Neuroticism (low Emotional Stability) in indecisiveness. This finding supports Savickas (2004) claim that chronic indecisiveness is associated with difficulties in managing anxiety. The results of the study also confirmed the second hypothesis as perceived cognitive failure explained a greater significant percentage of incremental variance in indecisiveness than did fluid intelligence and personality traits. These results thus also underlined the role in indecisiveness of cognitive factors and, in particular, perceived cognitive failure, including neglectfulness, loss of memorized information, distractibility and lack of ideas (Broadbent et al., 1982). The different aspects of cognitive failure can help explain indecisiveness: neglectfulness could result in people not attaching importance to making decisions or to making them unthinkingly; loss of memorized information could impede the decision-making process because people do not have the necessary information to make decisions; distractibility could draw people’s attention away from making decisions; lack of ideas could impede people from making decisions because of their inability to discern alternative decisions (Broadbent et al., 1982). In the literature on maladaptive style procrastination, the analysis of implicit cognitive processes is a topic that offers interesting prospects for in-depth study (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). A particularly interesting view is that decisional procrastination is related to cognitive failure and that, therefore, it is a manifestation of a delay in processing and evaluating information about
2.2.3. Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) (Broadbent et al., 1982) in the Italian version by Di Fabio and Palazzeschi , (in press) was used to evaluate perceived cognitive failure. The questionnaire has 25 items consisting of response options in a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from 0 = Never to 4 = Very often. The reliability coefficient of the Italian version of the scale was good: a = .81 (Di Fabio and Palazzeschi, in press; Di Fabio, Giannini, & Martelli, 2004). Example items: ‘‘Do you read something and find you haven’t been thinking about it and must read it again?’’ and ‘‘Do you find you forget appointments?’’ 2.2.4. Indecisiveness Scale (IS) The Indecisiveness Scale (IS) (Frost & Shows, 1993) in the Italian version by Di Fabio, Busoni, and Palazzeschi (2011) was used to evaluate indecisiveness. The scale (15 items) measures indecisiveness using a 5-point Likert scale that ranges from 1 = Strongly disagree to 5 = Strongly agree. The Italian version of the scale possessed good internal coherence (a = .85). Example items: ‘‘When ordering from a menu, I usually find it difficult to decide what to get’’ and ‘‘It seems that deciding on the most trivial thing takes me a long time’’. 3. Results Means and standard deviations for the APM, BFQ, CFQ and the IS as well as the correlations between these variables are reported in Table 2. Table 3 shows the results of the hierarchical regression with indecisiveness as the criterion measure and with fluid intelligence
Table 2 Means, standard deviations and correlations relative to APM, BFQ, CFQ, IS.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
APM – fluid intelligence Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Emotional stability Openness CFQ – perceived cognitive failure IS indecisiveness
Note: N = 429. * p < .05. ** p < .01.
M
SD
19.47 74.24 73.48 77.12 61.60 75.30 44.78 40.78
6.99 15.65 12.36 16.24 15.99 16.34 13.61 9.70
1
2 .05 .03 .02 .07 .04 .21** .12*
3
.46** .51** .50** .47** .15* .26**
4
.50** .37** .51** .08 .11*
5
.48** .52** .09 .07
6
.52** .27** .35**
7
.08 .10*
.39**
8
264
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265
Table 3 Hierarchical regression. The contributions of fluid intelligence, personality traits and perceived cognitive failure to indecisiveness (N = 429). Indecisiveness b Step 1 APM – fluid intelligence
.12*
Step 2 Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Emotional Stability Openness
.33*** .28*** .17** .36*** .07
Step 3 CFQ – perceived cognitive failure
.22***
2
R step 1 DR2 step 2 DR2 step 3 R2 total * ** ***
.02* .24*** .10*** .36***
p < .05. p < .01. p < .001.
alternative choices (Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 2000). In the literature, decisional procrastination is also linked to indecisiveness (Beswick et al., 1988; Effert & Ferrari, 1989; Ferrari, 1992; Ferrari & Emmons, 1994) and, consequently, in the present study it was assumed that cognitive failure could play a role in indecisiveness. The study results confirmed this assumption since indecisiveness was also linked to perceived cognitive failure thus underlining the role of perceived cognitive factors and not only personality traits in explaining indecisiveness. Although the results of the study appear promising as they underline the role of perceived cognitive factors in indecisiveness, some limitations need to be pointed out, for example the impossibility of generalizing the results beyond the specific sample of Italian students used in the study. Future research should use samples that are more widely representative of the Italian population, and the results of other international studies should be studied and compared. Notwithstanding its limitations, the present study highlighted the relationship between fluid intelligence, personality traits and perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness. The study results call for further investigation of the relationship between perceived cognitive failure and indecisiveness thereby opening up new areas for future research and intervention. Future research could investigate the role of the different aspects of perceived cognitive failure in indecisiveness, for example the three areas identified by Broadbent et al. (1982): the area of perception, the area of memory and the area of motor control. Such a study could determine whether certain aspects of perceived cognitive failure play a greater role than others in indecisiveness. Analysis of the role of perceived cognitive failure could also be extended to other decision-making difficulties such as those experienced in deciding on a career. Further confirmation of the results will highlight the importance of appropriate interventions for reducing perceptions of cognitive failure (as a primary prevention intervention); the importance of screening interventions for early specific training in perceived cognitive failure (as a secondary prevention intervention); and, finally, the importance of intervention in crisis situations involving perceived cognitive failure (as a tertiary prevention intervention). The findings also call for reflection on the implications for indecisiveness of cognitive failure, that is, poor attention span, loss of memorized information, distractibility and lack of ideas. Such reflection may prove to be of significance for future studies and new forms of intervention in terms of both prevention and recovery.
References Beswick, G., Rothblum, E. D., & Mann, L. (1988). Psychological antecedents to student procrastination. Australian Psychologist, 23, 207–217. Broadbent, D. E., Cooper, P. F., Fitzgerald, P., & Parkes, K. R. (1982). The cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 21, 1–16. Burka, J. B., & Yuen, L. M. (1983). Procrastination: Why do you do it and what to do about it. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley. Campbell, R. E., & Cellini, J. V. (1981). A diagnostic taxonomy of adult career problems. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 19, 175–190. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., & Borgogni, L. (1993). BFQ: Big five questionnaire (2nd ed.). Firenze: Giunti O.S. Constantine, M. G., Wallace, B. C., & Kindaichi, M. M. (2005). Examining contextual factors in the career decision status of African American adolescents. Journal of Career Assessment, 13, 307–319. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Crites, J. O. (1969). Vocational psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill. Diab, D. L., Gillespie, M. A., & Highhouse, S. (2008). Are maximizers really unhappy? The measurement of maximizing tendency. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 364–370. Di Fabio, A. (2006). Decisional procrastination correlates: Personality traits, selfesteem or perception of cognitive failure? International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 6(2), 109–122. Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (in press). Il Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ): Un contributo alla validazione italiana [The cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ): A contribution to Italian validation]. Counseling: Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni. Di Fabio, A., & Busoni, L. (2006). Covariation des styles décisionnels: Perception d’échec cognitif, estime de soi ou traits de personnalité? [Correlates of decisional styles: Perception of cognitive failure, self-esteem or personality traits?]. L’Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle, 35(3), 363–385. Di Fabio, A., Busoni, L., & Palazzeschi, L. (2011). Indecisiveness Scale (IS): Proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana [indecisiveness scale (IS): Psychometric properties of the Italian version]. Counseling: Giornale Italiano di Ricerca e Applicazioni, 4, 13–24. Di Fabio, A., & Clarotti, S. (2007). Matrici progressive di Raven Adattamento Italiano [Raven progressive matrices. The Italian adaptation]. Firenze: Giunti O.S.. Di Fabio, A., Giannini, M., & Martelli, M. (2004). Il Cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ): Proprietà psicometriche della versione italiana [Cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ): Psychometric properties of the Italian version]. Risorsa Uomo. Rivista di Psicologia del Lavoro e dell’Organizzazione, 10, 101–112. Di Fabio, A., & Palazzeschi, L. (2012). Incremental variance of the core selfevaluation construct compared to fluid intelligence and personality traits in aspects of decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 196–201. Di Fabio, A., Palazzeschi, L., Asulin-Peretz, L., & Gati, I. (in press). Career indecision versus indecisiveness: Associations with personality traits and emotional intelligence. Journal of Career Assessment. Effert, B., & Ferrari, J. R. (1989). Decisional procrastination: Examining personality correlates. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 151–156. Ferrari, J. R. (1991). Compulsive procrastination: Some self-reported characteristics. Psychological Reports, 68, 455–458. Ferrari, J. R. (1992). Psychometric validation of two procrastination inventories: Arousal and avoidance measures. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 14, 97–110. Ferrari, J. R. (2000). Procrastination and attention: Factor analysis of attention deficit, boredomness, intelligence, self-esteem and task delay frequencies. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 185–196. Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Information search processes by indecisives: Individual differences in decisional procrastination. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 127–137. Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (2001). Behavioral information search processes by indecisives. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 1113–1123. Ferrari, J. R., & Emmons, R. A. (1994). Procrastination and revenge: Do people report using delays as a strategy for vengeance? Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 539–544. Ferrari, J. R., Johnson, J. L., & McCown, W. G. (1995). Procrastination and Task Avoidance. New York: Plenum. Ferrari, J. R., McCown, W., & Johnson, J. (1989). Validation of an adult inventory of procrastination. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Psychology: Villanova University. Frost, R. O., & Shows, D. L. (1993). The nature and measurement of compulsive indecisiveness. Behavior Research Therapy, 31, 683–692. Gayton, W. F., Clavin, R. H., Clavin, S. L., & Broida, J. (1994). Further validation of the indecisiveness scale. Psychological Reports, 75, 1631–1634. Germeijs, V., & De Boeck, P. (2002). A measurement scale for indecisiveness and its relationship to career indecision and other types of indecision. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 113–122. Germeijs, V., & Verschueren, K. (2011). Indecisiveness and big five personality factors: Relationship and specificity. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 1023–1028. Harriott, J. S., Ferrari, J. R., & Dovidio, J. F. (1996). Distractibility, daydreaming, and self-critical cognitions as determinants of indecision. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 337–344.
A. Di Fabio, L. Palazzeschi / Personality and Individual Differences 54 (2013) 261–265 Jackson, C. J., Furnham, A., & Lawty-Jones, M. (1999). Relationship between indecisiveness and neuroticism: The moderating effect of a tough-minded culture. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 789–800. Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley. Nilsson, J. E., Flores, L. Y., Berkel, L. V., Schale, C. L., Linnemeyer, R. M., & Summer, I. (2007). International career articles: A content analysis of four journals across 34 years. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 70, 602–613. Osipow, S. H. (1999). Assessing career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 147–154. Rassin, E., & Muris, P. (2005a). Indecisiveness and the interpretation of ambiguous situations. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1285–1291.
265
Rassin, E., & Muris, P. (2005b). To be or not to be. . .indecisive: Gender differences, correlations with obsessive-compulsive complaints, and behavioural manifestation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1175–1181. Raven, J. C. (1962). Advanced progressive matrices. Firenze: Organizzazioni Speciali. Rigas, G., Carling, E., & Brehmer, B. (2002). Reliability and validity of performance measures in microworlds. Intelligence, 30, 463–480. Savickas, M. (2004). Vocational psychology. In C. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied psychology (pp. 655–667). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. Veinott, E. S. (2002). The effect of understanding and anticipated regret on decision readiness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Michigan.