Skip to main content
Log in

Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the multifactorial memory questionnaire for adults and the elderly

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neurological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reliable and valid metamemory measures are needed to assess subjective memory complaints that can be distinct from objective memory performance. The Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire (MMQ) evaluates dimensions of subjective memory functioning such as frequency of memory problems (Ability), affect related to memory abilities (Contentment), and strategy use in everyday life (Strategy). To examine the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the MMQ, six hundred Italian healthy individuals (aged 25–91 years) completed MMQ, a questionnaire assessing metacognition (Cognitive Failures Questionnaire, CFQ) and two batteries assessing cognitive global status (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA; Mini Mental State Examination, MMSE). MMQ was easy to administer, acceptable, and had good test–retest reliability (r for the total MMQ score 0.95), and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α for the total MMQ score = 0.83). An exploratory factor analysis provided a four-factor solution: “Ability” (α = 0.99), “Contentment” (α = 0.91), “External Strategies” (α = 0.85) and “Internal Strategies” (α = 0.78) factors. MMQ total score and MMQ-Ability factor score showed good convergent validity when compared to CFQ score (r rho ≥ 0.51), whereas MMQ total score and the four MMQ factors showed good divergent validity when compared to MoCA and MMSE score (r rho ≤ 0.27). Demographic variables significantly influenced MMQ total score and most subscale scores. From the derived linear equations, we computed correction factors for raw scores and percentile distribution of adjusted scores. The Italian version of MMQ is reliable and valid to assess dimensions of metamemory in adult and elderly subjects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ito K, Inagaki H, Sugiyama M, Okamura T, Shimokado K, Awata S (2013) Association between subjective memory complaints and mental health well-being in urban community-dwelling elderly in Japan. Geriatr Gerontol Int 13(1):234–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th edn. Washington, DC

  3. Mitchell AJ, Beaumont H, Ferguson D, Yadegarfar M, Stubbs B (2014) Risk of dementia and mild cognitive impairment in older people with subjective memory complaints: meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand 130(6):439–451

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lineweaver TT, Hertzog C (1998) Adults’ efficacy and control beliefs regarding memory and aging: separating general from personal beliefs. Aging Neuropsychol Cognit 5:264–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Roberts JL, Clare L, Woods RT (2009) Subjective memory complaints and awareness of memory functioning in mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 28(2):95–109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Herrmann DJ, Neisser U (1978) An inventory of everyday memory experiences. In: Gruneberg MM, Morris P, Sykes RN (eds) Practical aspects of memory. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  7. Troyer AK, Rich JB (2002) Psychometric properties of a new metamemory questionnaire for older adults. J Gerontol 57:19–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dixon RA, Hultsch DF (1983) Structure and development of metamemory in adulthood. J Gerontol 38:682–688

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fort I, Adoul L, Holl D, Kaddour J, Gana K (2004) Psychometric properties of the French version of the multifactorial memory questionnaire for adults and the elderly. Can J Aging 23(4):347–357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, Cummings JL, Chertkow H (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 53(4):695–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Santangelo G, Siciliano M, Pedone R, Vitale C, Falco F, Bisogno R, Siano P, Barone P, Grossi D, Santangelo F, Trojano L (2015) Normative data for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 36(4):585–591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Broadbent DE, Cooper PF, FitzGerald P, Parkes KR (1982) The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. Br J Clin Psychol 21(Pt 1):1–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stratta P, Rinaldi O, Daneluzzo E, Rossi A (2006) Utilizzo della versione italiana del Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) in un campione di studenti: uno studio di validazione. Rivista di Psichiatria 41:260–265

    Google Scholar 

  14. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12(3):189–198

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Measso G, Cavarzeran F, Zappalà C, Lebowitz BD, Crook TH, Pirozzolo FJ (1993) The mini-mental state examination. Normative study of an Italian random sample. Dev Neuropsychol 9:77–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR (1995) Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 4:293–307

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bandalos DL, Finney SJ (2010) Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In: Hancock GR, Mueller RO (Eds) The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences. Routledge Taylor and Francis, New York

  18. Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust (2002) Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11:193–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bartlett MS (1954) A further note on the multiplying factors for various Χ2 approximations in factor analysis. J Roy Stat Soc 16:296–298

    Google Scholar 

  23. Field AP (2005) Discovering Statistics using SPSS. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cattell RB, Vogelman S (1977) A Comprehensive Trial of the Scree and KG Criteria for Determining the Number of Factors. Multivar Behav Res 12:289–325

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Cohen JW (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. In: Hillsdale (ed), 2nd edn. Laurence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey

  26. Spinnler H, Tognoni G (1987) Standardizzazione e taratura italiana di test neuropsicologici. Ital J Neurol Sci 6(Suppl 8):8–120

    Google Scholar 

  27. Van der Elst W, Hoogenhout EM, Dixon RA, De Groot RHM, Jolles J (2011) The Dutch Memory Compensation Questionnaire: psychometric properties and regression-based norms. Assessment 18(4):517–529

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Tomita T, Sugawara N, Kaneda A, Okubo N, Iwane K, Takahashi I, Kaneko S, Yasui-Furukori N (2014) Sex-specific effects of subjective memory complaints with respect to cognitive impairment or depressive symptoms. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 68(3):176–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jonker C, Geerlings MI, Schmand B (2000) Are memory complaints predictive for dementia? A review of clinical and population-based studies. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 15:983–991

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wilson RS, Evans DA (1996) How clearly do we see our memories? J Am Geriatr Soc 44(1):93–94

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fritsch T, McClendon MJ, Wallendal MS, Hyde TF, Larsen JD (2014) Prevalence and Cognitive Bases of Subjective Memory Complaints in Older Adults: evidence from a community sample. J Neurodegener Dis 2014:176843

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Parisi JM, Gross AL, Rebok GW, Saczynski JS, Crowe M, Cook SE, Langbaum JBS, Sartori A, Unverzagt FW (2011) Modeling change in memory performance and memory perceptions: findings from the ACTIVE study. Psychol Aging 26(3):518–524

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Trojano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The Authors declares that there is no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 97 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raimo, S., Trojano, L., Siciliano, M. et al. Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the multifactorial memory questionnaire for adults and the elderly. Neurol Sci 37, 681–691 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-016-2562-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-016-2562-5

Keywords

Navigation