ArticleJournal of behavioral addictions2026
The development of the Metacognitions About Boredom Scale (MABS) and its role in problematic social media use.
Article in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Boredom is a universal affective-cognitive state arising from unmet needs for meaningful engagement. Although unpleasant, boredom can inspire creativity and purposeful action or trigger maladaptive behaviors such as problematic social media use (PSMU). The present study developed and validated the Metacognitions About Boredom Scale (MABS), a new instrument designed to assess positive and negative metacognitions about boredom. Methods: The research comprised two studies. Study 1 involved mixed-methods item generation and large-scale validation among Iranian adults (N = 1,021; 58.0% females; mean age = 39.4 years), employing exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Study 2 involved at-risk individuals with problematic social media use (N = 234); bifactor and ROC analyses were conducted to determine an optimal cut-off score for positive and negative metacognitions about boredom. Results: Study 1 supported a stable two-factor structure of positive and negative metacognitions about boredom, confirmed through both exploratory and confirmatory analyses. Both subscales demonstrated excellent reliability, strong test-retest stability, and full measurement invariance across gender and age. Incremental validity analyses showed that the MABS predicted boredom and PSMU beyond general metacognitions. Study 2 confirmed the bifactor model, and ROC analysis indicated an optimal cut-off of ≥32 on the negative belief subscale for distinguishing individuals at risk of boredom-driven PSMU, yielding 95.3% sensitivity and 97.1% specificity. Conclusions: The MABS is a valid, theory-based tool assessing boredom-related metacognitions and identifying cognitive risks for maladaptive online behaviors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.