Journal of Boredom
Studies (ISSN 2990-2525)
Issue 3, 2025, pp. 1–20
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17392810
https://www.boredomsociety.com/jbs
Predicting Boredom
Based on Gratitude and Integrative Self-Knowledge in Adolescents: With the
Mediating Role of the Meaning of Life from Three Existential, Cognitive, and
Neurological Approaches
Sara Khalilnezhad
Shiraz University, Islamic Republic of Iran
https://orcid.org/0009-0005-7799-4212
How to cite this paper: Khalilnezhad, S. (2025).
Predicting Boredom Based on Gratitude and Integrative Self-Knowledge in
Adolescents: With the Mediating Role of the Meaning of Life from Three
Existential, Cognitive, and Neurological Approaches. Journal of Boredom
Studies, 3.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17392810
Abstract: Boredom signals a lack of meaning. Gratitude and
self-knowledge promote feelings of meaning in life. I proposed accordingly that
gratitude and self-knowledge, by engendering meaning, shield against boredom in
adolescents. Specifically, I hypothesized that gratitude and self-knowledge
prevent boredom by increasing perceptions of meaning in life, through
existential, cognitive, and neurological approaches. A total of 238 high school
students (both girls and boys) from Shiraz, Iran, participated in this study,
selected through a multi-stage cluster sampling method. Participants completed
questionnaires measuring trait boredom, gratitude, meaning in life, and
integrative self-knowledge. Results indicated that gratitude and reflective
self-knowledge significantly and positively predicted the ‘meaning presence’
component, which in turn significantly and negatively predicted trait boredom.
The mediating role of the meaning presence was confirmed. These findings
suggest that gratitude and reflective self-knowledge reduce boredom by
enhancing meaning presence in life. To summarize, gratitude and reflective
self-knowledge correspond with the cognitive, existential, and neurological
functions of boredom and can predict a decrease in boredom.
Keywords: boredom, DMN, gratitude, meaning, self-knowledge.
1. Introduction
Boredom is a phenomenon
that has been discussed sporadically for centuries, being often linked to the
study of melancholy (Ros Velasco, 2022, 2026). At present, attention to the experience
of boredom is increasing, and researchers, scientists, and philosophers are
trying to create a more comprehensive view of the phenomenon by combining
practical and theoretical approaches (see, e.g., Elpidorou,
2023; Finkielsztein,
2023; Ros Velasco, 2022, 2026; Svendsen, 2005). Today, boredom experts believe
that we need to integrate the inescapable experience of boredom into the public
discourse and to shed the prejudices and myths that prevent us from
understanding and harnessing it in its multifaceted entirety, those that lead
us to seek immediate escape from boredom, rather than embrace it and examine it
closely to reap its benefits in social terms (Ros Velasco, 2023). In addition, correlational and
experimental studies on existential, cognitive theories, and even neurological
research specifically in the field of boredom are increasing (see, e.g., Csíkszentmihályi, 2000; Danckert and Merrifield, 2018; Eastwood et al., 2012; Van Tilburg and Igou, 2013, 2017b, 2019).
Throughout
the history of the West, philosophers, poets, and writers have developed categories
for describing different experiences of boredom (see, e.g., Doehlemann,
1991; Flaubert, 1980; Heidegger, 1976; Valéry, 1951). For example, Martin Heidegger (1976) speaks of a kind of deep boredom
that includes existential boredom, where one has a mood without direction and
without origin, which includes a loss of meaning in the world
as a whole. Gathering the opinions and theories of thinkers in the field
of boredom from the past to the present, Ros Velasco (2023) defines boredom as follows:
boredom is a
state of malaise that we suffer from when the environment in which we find ourselves immersed
or the activity
we try to engage in does not stimulate us in line with our initial
expectations, resulting in the painful experience of meaninglessness. We all suffer from this,
more or less frequently,
at different times and in different places, depending on both exogenous factors
that stem from the possibilities of the context, and endogenous related to one’s own
personality and expectations. The person who is bored feels that their
relationship with the present
reality is damaged and they should do whatever within their grasp to return to an optimum state of
stimulation, which translates
into the sense of wellbeing yearned for.
She offers one of the
most recent categorizations of types of boredom, taking into account
historical, philosophical, psychological, and structural aspects, which include:
(1) situation-dependent and transient boredom (also known as state boredom),
(2) situation-dependent and chronic boredom (social approach), (3)
individual-dependent and chronic boredom (cognitive and neurological approach,
also known as trait boredom), and (4) profound boredom (existential approach)
(Ros Velasco, 2025, 2026).
Research
shows that both trait
and state boredom have a strong connection to meaning of life (Fahlman
et al., 2009;
Van Tilburg et al., 2013, 2019, 2022; Van Tilburg and Igou, 2011; 2017b). Gratitude has been identified as a positive resource for
protection against psychological challenges (Wood et al., 2010). A grateful person may not always
experience gratitude, but they are likely to experience gratitude in certain
situations, so grateful people have a lower threshold for boredom. Gratitude is
also a psychological resource that can prevent boredom, and it does so by
providing a sense of meaning in life (O’Dea et al., 2024). Self-knowledge provides a unique
philosophy of life for each individual that can be
used to make decisions about relationships, behaviors, and valuable goals. As a
result, it imbues life activities with meaning and value (Schlegel, 2009).
The
present research is a correlational study which analyzes the role of gratitude
and self-knowledge in predicting boredom through the mediation of meaning in
life, as well as a review of the research conducted on the interaction of three
of the above highlighted approaches to the phenomenon of boredom: existential,
cognitive, and neurological.
1.1. Boredom Trait or State?
Boredom is often defined
as the aversive experience of wanting, but being unable, to engage in
satisfying activity (Eastwood et al., 2012). State-based (or situation-dependent
and transient boredom) is momentary and often evoked by situations that are
dull, repetitive, and unchallenging (Chan et al., 2018). But boredom is not only caused by boring
situations (e.g., monotony, constraint, mismatched challenge, devalued
activities [Danckert and Eastwood, 2020]) but also by psychological factors
or individual differences. This notion is consistent with early theorizing on
two types of boredom: one caused by external, environmental circumstances
(stated-based or situation-dependent boredom) and the other caused by internal
factors (boredom that comes from within, i.e., trait boredom or
individual-dependent boredom [Bernstein, 1975; Neu, 1998; Todman, 2003]. Psychological factors might predispose some
people to experience boredom regardless of the situation (Mercer-Lynn et al., 2014). Studies also show that boredom can also result from a
situationally induced boredom that, when sustained over time, becomes chronic
(situation-dependent and chronic boredom [Ros Velasco, 2025, 2026]).
In such cases, even when the individual knows what they would like to do in
order to meaningfully occupy their time, they are unable to pursue this
occupation not due to a psychological issue, but because the environment in
which boredom arises is too constrictive or limiting) Ros Velasco, 2025, 2026). Profound/existential might be the result of
trait boredom (individual-dependent) and situation-dependent and chronic
boredom (Ros Velasco, 2025, 2026).
While
boredom can be fleeting and situationally determined, some people experience
boredom more often than others. This observation gave rise to the concept of boredom
proneness (here referred to as trait boredom [Farmer and Sundberg, 1986]). Boredom proneness is a
trait-like construct representing individual differences in the frequency and
intensity of boredom
and the perception that one’s life is boring (Tam et al., 2021). According to Gorelik and Eastwood
(2024), the definition of trait boredom
consists of two parts; namely they suggest that to be highly trait-bored means
that one often experiences boredom (not because of constrictive or limiting
situations), and that one possesses at least some of the psychological factors
(individual differences) thought to cause boredom. Thus, they are proposing to
define trait boredom in terms of the frequency and cause of boredom. The first
component—frequently experiencing boredom—can be measured directly via
self-report, and the second component—possessing the psychological factors
thought to cause boredom—establishes a nomological network for demonstrating
the validity of a self-report measure of trait boredom. By defining trait
boredom in this manner, we can draw on existing empirical research and theory
related to boredom; in particular, building on our understanding of the
psychological causes of boredom. At this point, I have chosen to prioritize
frequency of boredom, as opposed to other qualities of the experience such as
pervasiveness, duration, intensity, and tolerability. Trait Boredom Scale (TBS)
was built on this basis (Gorelik and Eastwood, 2024).
1.2. Gratitude
Broadly defined,
gratitude is a habitual focus on an appreciation of the positive aspects of
life (Wood et al., 2010).
It can be conceptualized as an emotional response, a mood, or a trait involving an appreciation
of what is good in life (Ma et al., 2017).
Gratitude is linked to ample psychological, physical, and relational benefits
across the lifespan (Portocarrero et al., 2020; Wood et al., 2010). As an emotion, gratitude involves
a two-stage cognitive process: a) recognizing that something positive has
occurred, and b) recognizing that an external agent played a role in achieving
it (Wiener, 1985). Gratitude is a strong predictor
of meaning in life, possibly through positive affect (King et al., 2006).
Gratitude predicts less
boredom, and this relationship is mediated by presence of meaning in life
(O’Dea et al., 2024).
1.3. Self-Knowledge
In all of times,
self-knowledge has been considered an important stage in the life of every
human being who wants to achieve security, peace, and true happiness. As Laozi,
who lived in China around five hundred years before Christ during the time of
Confucius, states in the book Tao Te Ching:
“Knowing others is intelligence and awareness, knowing oneself is pure wisdom.
Mastering others is power, mastering oneself is true power” (1991, v. 33). Genesis emphasizes that “God created
man in His own image and for Himself. Therefore, knowing ourselves
leads to knowing the reflection of God’s image” (Hamilton, 1990, Gen
1:24). This is why
self-knowledge in Christianity leads to God-knowledge. In the Quran, the holy
book of Muslims, it is stated: “Do not be like those who forgot God and God
made them forget themselves” (Quran 59:19).
Morin
(2017) compiled a comprehensive set of
terms related to the self, providing definitions based on prior research to
offer a practical framework for scholars. In his definition, self-knowledge
refers to “an organized set of accurate self-information, a realistic
self-concept, and accurate introspection about oneself” (Carlson, 2013; Gibbons, 1983; cited in Morin, 2017, p. 2). The meaning of self-knowledge in the
present study is the Integrative self-knowledge that was proposed by Ghorbani (2008). He stated that Integrative self-knowledge
refers to the individual’s effort to integrate his/her experience in the past,
present, and future in order to adapt and improve
himself/herself. Integrative self-knowledge means understanding the current
mechanisms in the flow, within oneself, in a way that is temporally aligned. In
this way, understanding of ongoing experiences, in the present, is integrated with
stable mental reconstructions that arise from past experiences (Ghorbani 2008; Ghorbani et al., 2003). In their opinion, this model was
built for the purpose of an integrated understanding of the processes within
himself/herself as well as awareness of them and increased awareness of
intrapsychic dynamics, and it has two aspects: experiential self-knowledge and
reflective self-knowledge, which include the cognitive processing of
information related to himself/herself in the present and past. Coherent
self-knowledge is the capacity to understand the temporality and coherence of
one’s internal processes and experiences (Ghorbani, 2008). In other words, experiential
self-knowledge is the receptive processing of information related to the self
that takes place in terms of its moment-to-moment and dynamic changes in the
present. It provides immediate input from personal experiences that is
necessary to cope with challenges and achieve future goals,
and also prevents automatic and involuntary forms of responding. On the
other hand, reflective self-knowledge is the cognitive processing of
information related to the self that is related to the past. In reflective
self-knowledge, the individual analyzes personal experiences through higher and
more complex cognitive actions and, through this, achieves more complex mental
schemes that facilitate his adaptation (Ghorbani et al., 2003).
As
Brodsky (1995) emphasizes, boredom has above all
a formative value as it shows the self its own finitude and cultivates in it a
sensitivity that has a moral effect (compassion) as well as a richer experience
of life and of oneself. There is no self-deception in boredom, and this is the
beginning of self-knowledge. However, Bambrah et al. (2023) examined the relationship between
boredom, self-knowledge (i.e., awareness of one’s internal experiences), and
self-directed attention (i.e., focusing on internal states) and found that
trait and state boredom is positively associated with self-directed attention
but negatively associated with self-knowledge—suggesting that individuals prone
to boredom frequently focus on their thoughts and feelings without clearly
understanding them, leading to a sense of disconnection from their goals and
desires. When an external environment fails to engage a person cognitively
(because of monotony, inappropriate levels of challenge, lack of choice, or
devalued activities [Elpidorou, 2018]), individuals may instead focus
inward on the distress caused by a lack of cognitive engagement (Bambrah et al., 2023). This is consistent with psychodynamic
theories of boredom, which posit that boredom stems from an inability to
consciously decipher what one desires (e.g., Wangh, 1975).
1.4. Meaning in Life
According to the model
proposed by Steger et al. (2008),
meaning in life is a highly desirable psychological quality. People search
meaning when they feel their lives have little meaning or when they are losing
it. The first aspect, the meaning presence, indicates whether an individual
sees their life as meaningful and purposeful. This term refers to the
perception of oneself and the world around them, including the perception of
how one fits into the world. The second aspect, the meaning search, refers to
the strength, intensity, and active effort of individuals to create or increase
their perception of meaning and purpose in their lives (‘How can I make my life
more meaningful?’). While the meaning presence implies some kind of outcome,
the meaning search refers to an active and process-oriented factor (Steger et
al., 2008). Accordingly, the Steger questionnaire (Steger et al.,
2006),
in addition to the
existential aspect of meaning (meaning presence), also focuses on the cognitive
aspect of meaning (meaning search).
1.4.1. Approaches of
Boredom Regarding Meaning in Live
Existential Approach: From an existential approach, the
absence of meaning plays a central role in boredom. Boredom is associated with
a sense of meaninglessness and is linked to various psychological and
physiological problems, such as symptoms of depression, anxiety, and increased
stress (Goldberg et al., 2011;
Lee and Zelman, 2019; O’Dea et al., 2024). However, strategies for reducing
boredom and mitigating its consequences are still underexplored. Emerging
evidence suggests that experiences which enhance a sense of meaning can buffer
against boredom (O’Dea et al., 2022;
Van Tilburg et al., 2019).
Cognitive Approach: From a cognitive approach, boredom
is primarily characterized by two elements: negative appraisal of one’s
situation and attention difficulties (Eastwood et al., 2012; Van Tilburg and Igou, 2017a). These elements can function both
as causes and as components of the experience of boredom. They are also
interrelated: a negative evaluation of one’s situation can lead to inattention,
while a lack of attentional engagement often leads to a negative appraisal. The
prevailing view is that negative appraisals linked to boredom are rooted in the
perception that one’s situation lacks meaning (Elpidorou,
2023). Supporting this view, studies
have shown a strong association between the experience of boredom and the
perception of meaninglessness (Fahlman et al., 2009; Van Tilburg and Igou, 2017b). When individuals are no
longer cognitively engaged in a satisfying way, cognitive approach suggests two
broad strategies to restore engagement: one option is to shift to a different
topic or activity in the hope that it will be more fulfilling; the other is to
re-evaluate one’s relationship to the current task or situation to make it more
meaningful (Elpidorou, 2023).
Neurological Approach:
From a neurological
approach, research has shown that activity in the default mode network (DMN)
increases during experiences of boredom (Danckert and Merrifield, 2018), as well as during periods of
creativity, imagination, and idea generation (Bartoli et al., 2024). EEG studies indicate that the
onset of boredom does not signal a complete disengagement but rather a shift in
the form of engagement, typically inward (Katahira et
al., 2018; Perone et al., 2019; Tabatabaie et al., 2014; Yakobi
et al., 2021). Activity in the DMN has been shown to decrease when one is actively engaged
in a task and attention is externally directed (Gusnard
and Raichle, 2001). Indeed, when an individual is
actively engaged in a demanding task, activity in a central executive network
(CEN) typically increases while activity in the DMN decreases (Greicius
et al., 2003; Mason et al., 2007; Weissman et al., 2006).
According
to Steger et al.’s (2008) definition
of meaning, the meaning presence implies some kind of outcome, which does not
require focusing on external activity but is a form of introspection. So it
can activate the DMN system because it is outcome-involved and
introspective. The meaning
search, which is an active and process-oriented factor that focuses on external
activity, can activate the CEN system. Of course, this claim is based on
evidence from the activity of the two networks DMN and CEN, but it has not yet
been neurologically investigated exactly which brain networks are activated by
the meaning presence or the meaning search in life. Additionally, reflective self-knowledge is
associated with increased activity in the brain’s DMN (Schneider et al., 2008; Whitfield-Gabrieli et al., 2011). Neurological studies also show
that increased gratitude modulates the connections of the DMN and improves
emotion regulation and spontaneity (Kyeong et al., 2017). Although neurological variables were not
measured in this study, neurological evidence and research studies were
reviewed.
Figure
1 depicts the proposed model for this research.
Figure 1. Conceptual
Research Model
I
examined the relationship between gratitude and boredom using existential,
cognitive, and neurological approaches, that is, considering and integrating
perceptions of meaning in life (Steger et al., 2006). Given that boredom features low meaning in
life (Van Tilburg and Igou, 2012, 2017a) and gratitude fosters feelings of
meaning in life (Kleiman et al., 2013;
McCullough, 2002), and studies also show that
boredom trait is positively associated with egocentrism and negatively
associated with self-knowledge (awareness of one’s own thoughts, feelings, and
memories [Bambrah et al., 2023]), I hypothesize that meaning in life instilled by gratitude and integrative
self-knowledge protects against boredom experiences. This hypothesis rests on
research indicating that sources of meaning in life counteract boredom (O’Dea
et al., 2022; Van Tilburg et al., 2013, 2019). My hypothesis regarding the relationship between gratitude and integrative
self-knowledge (as the predictor) and boredom (as the criterion) and meaning in
life (as mediating variable) builds on two specific components:
Hypothesis 1: Gratitude and integrative self-knowledge
predict less boredom.
Hypothesis 2: Perceptions of meaning in life
mediate the relation between gratitude and
integrative
self-knowledge with boredom.
2. Method
This study examined
gratitude and integrative self-knowledge as predictors
of boredom in adolescents, with the mediating role of meaning in life, through
existential, cognitive, and neurological approaches. The study is considered
applied in terms of its purpose and nature. Regarding data collection and
implementation, it follows a descriptive (non-experimental) and correlational
design. To test that the negative association between gratitude and boredom is
attributable to their shared relation to meaning in life, I employed Model 4
from PROCESS (Hayes, 2018)
with 10,000 bootstraps, using gratitude and integrative self-knowledge as the
predictor, meaning in life as the mediator, and boredom as the criterion.
2.1. Participants
Because of the few
existing studies on the experience of boredom in adolescents carried out so far,
the sample of this study was selected from a statistical population of
adolescents. Despite having many opportunities for learning and recreation,
they often report feelings of boredom (Drob and Bernard, 1987; Van Tilburg et al., 2013). Adolescents who experience
chronic boredom are less likely to participate in hobbies and activities such
as sports, and more likely to overuse the Internet or engage in risky behaviors
such as substance use (Biolcati et al., 2017). Although statistics on boredom
prevalence are limited, existing data suggest that boredom is most common
around ages 17–18 (Danckert and Eastwood, 2020).
I
aimed for power (1 − ß) = .80, anticipating a moderate correlation of ρ = .35, adopting a Type-I error α = .05
(two-tailed). I controlled for potential order effects by assigning
participants at random to different orders of the measured constructs. This
sample was selected using a cluster random method and was based on Kline’s (2005) criterion of 2.5 to 5 times the
number of items in the research instruments. Accordingly, I required a sample
of 170 participants. Given that I used order variations studies that are prone
to dropouts, I exceeded the required sample size. The statistical population
consisted of high school students from Shiraz, Iran. The number of participants
in this study was 250, and after eliminating those who met the exclusion
criteria, the sample size reached 238, that from among the existing classes. Nine
classes were randomly selected and all students of the
selected classes constituted the research participants. The research
participants were students in the 10th, 11th, and 12th
grades of high school (143 girls, 95 boys) between the ages of 15 to 19 years
(Mage = 16.43, SD = 1.02).
2.2. Procedure and
Materials
Following data
collection, SPSS-27 was used to enter data, calculate means, standard
deviations, correlation coefficients, Cronbach’s alpha, and to conduct multiple
regression analyses. PROCESS Model 4 (Hayes, 2018) with 10,000 bootstraps was applied to assess
the significance of mediating effects in the model and AMOS-24 was used for
structural equation modeling, confirmatory factor analysis, and hypothesis
testing.
After obtaining the students’ consents, the research
questionnaires were administered in groups in the randomly selected classes.
After giving informed consents, participants reported demographics regarding
their age and gender. Then completed the following questionnaires:
1) Trait Boredom Scale
(TBS), based on the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS), which
integrates dimensions such as non-participation, high arousal, low arousal,
inattention, and time perception into a single construct—agency. The scale
includes 6 items such as ‘I often feel bored’, that from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) (coefficient alpha = .91
[Gorelik and Eastwood, 2024]).
As this scale had not been standardized in Iran, I translated and adapted it
for use in this study in accordance with ethical and scientific principles.
Confirmatory factor analysis yielded a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.77.
2) Then participants
completed Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ), that measured two dimensions of
meaning: meaning presence (MP-MLQ) and meaning
search (MS-MLQ). The MLQ consists of 10 items with scales ranging from 1 (absolutely untrue)
to 7 (absolutely true).
Items 1, 4, 5, 6, and 9 assess MP-MLQ (e.g., ‘I understand the meaning of my
life’), while items 2, 3, 7, 8, and 10 assess MS-MLQ (e.g., ‘I am always
looking for the purpose of my life’). Item 9 is reverse scored (coefficient
alpha values ranging from .82 to .87 for the scale and subscales [Steger et al.,
2006]).
3) Afterward,
participants completed the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6), that measured the
intensity, frequency, density, and span of gratitude experiences. GQ-6 has 6
items such as ‘I have many things in my life for which I am grateful’. Items
were rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly
agree) (coefficient alpha = .82 [McCullough et al.,
2002]).
4) Integrative
Self-Knowledge Questionnaire (ISK) measured integrative self-knowledge by
combining three components: experiential self-knowledge (E-ISK), reflective
self-knowledge (R-ISK), and cohesive self-knowledge (C-ISK). ISK has 12 items whose
responses are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (mostly false) to 5 (mostly
true). E-ISK items include, e.g., ‘I often get so caught up in what is
happening that I can’t really see how I am going to behave in that situation’;
R-ISK items include, e.g., ‘Through deep reflection on myself, I have
discovered what I really want in life and how I might achieve it’; and C-ISK
items include, e.g., ‘I get confused whenever I try to analyze my role in a
problem’. Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 are reverse scored
(coefficient alpha values ranging from .74 to .90 for the scale and subscales [Ghorbani,
2008]).
3. Results
This study measured four
main variables: gratitude (GQ6), integrative self-knowledge (ISK), meaning in
life (MLQ), and trait boredom (TBS) and their subscales. The correlation matrix
of the scales and subscales is shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Correlation
Matrix of Measures
|
|
Measures |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
|
1 |
TBS |
1 |
-0/37** |
-0/42** |
-0/18** |
-0/15* |
0/35** |
0/37** |
-0/39** |
0/46** |
|
2 |
MLQ |
|
1 |
0/76** |
0/81** |
0/39** |
0/03 |
-0/11 |
0/48** |
-0/22** |
|
3 |
MP-MLQ |
|
|
1 |
0/25** |
0/36** |
-0/12 |
-0/14* |
0/48** |
-0/30** |
|
4 |
MS-MLQ |
|
|
|
1 |
0/25** |
0/03 |
0/03 |
0/28** |
-0/06 |
|
5 |
GQ6 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
0/12* |
0/06 |
-0/24** |
-0/02 |
|
6 |
ISK |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
0/85** |
0/09* |
0/82** |
|
7 |
E-ISK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
0/13 |
0/58** |
|
8 |
R-ISK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
-0/31** |
|
9 |
C-ISK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
TBS: Trait Boredom Scale; MP-MLQ: Meaning presence from MLQ; MS-MLQ: Meaning
search from MLQ; GQ6: Gratitude Questionnaire; ISK: Integrative Self-Knowledge;
E-ISK: Experiential Self-Knowledge from ISK; R-ISK: Reflective Self-Knowledge
from ISK; C-ISK: Cohesive Self-Knowledge from ISK.
p≥ .001** p ≥.05*
Gratitude
was significantly positively correlated with meaning presence and meaning
search and was significantly negatively correlated with boredom. There was a
significant positive correlation between reflective self-knowledge with meaning
presence and meaning search and it was significantly negatively correlated with
boredom (see Table 1).
To
test the role of presence and search of meaning in life, I used PROCESS Model 4
(Hayes, 2018) with 10,000 bootstraps and
AMOS-24. The results indicate that gratitude
directly and positively predicts the meaning presence, B = .213, SE = .04, t(237) = 5.190, p < .001, 95% CI [.129, .287]. This
means that with increasing gratitude, the meaning presence also increases. Also,
gratitude directly and positively
predicts the meaning search, B =
.130, SE = .05, t(237) = 2.398, p < .05, 95% CI [.023, .236]. This
means that with increasing gratitude, the meaning search also increases.
Experiential
self-knowledge was significantly and positively associated with the meaning
presence, B = -.023, SE = .05, t(237)
= -.406, p < .05, 95% CI [-.132, .087], and it was not significantly
associated with the meaning search. Reflective
self-knowledge was significantly and negatively associated with meaning
presence, B = .474, SE = .07, t(237) = 6.50, p < .001, 95% CI [.330, .618], and also reflective self-knowledge was significantly and positively associated with the meaning
search, B = 0.357, SE = .09, t(237)
= 3.64, p < .001, 95% CI [.164, .551]. Cohesive
self-knowledge was significantly and positively associated with the meaning
presence, B = -.119, SE = .05, t(237) = -2.33, p < .05, 95% CI [-.218, -.019], and was
not significantly associated with the meaning search. Meaning
presence was significantly and negatively associated with boredom, B = -.174, SE = .02, t(237)
= -6.821, p < .001, 95% CI [-1.191,
-.637]. The meaning search was not significantly associated with boredom. The
total effect of gratitude on boredom was significant, B = -.267, SE = .08, t(237) = -2.489, p < .05, 95% CI [- .478, -.055]. It
was comprised of a significant direct effect of gratitude on boredom, B = -.003, SE = .07, t(237) = -.030,
p < .05, 95% CI [-.217, -.211],
and a significant indirect effect through meaning presence, B = -.252, SE = .04, t(237) = -.103 , p
< .05, 95% CI [-.226, -.095]. The total effect of reflective self-knowledge on boredom was significant, B
= -1.068, SE = .08, t(237) = -5.992, p
< .001, 95% CI [-1.419, -.717]. It was comprised of a significant direct
effect of reflective self-knowledge on boredom, B = -.638, SE =
.07, t(237) = -3.182, p < .001, 95% CI [-1.033, -.243], and a
significant indirect effect through meaning presence, B = -.432, SE
= .05, t(237) = -4.479
, p < .001, 95% CI [-.102,
-.124].
Gratitude was significantly and negatively associated with boredom B = -0.117, SE = .07, t(237) = -1.98, p < .05, 95% CI [-.478, -.056]. This means that with increasing gratitude, boredom decreases. Experiential self-knowledge was significantly and positively associated with boredom B = .203, SE = .08, t(237) = 2.95, p < .001, 95% CI [.517, .975]. Cohesive self-knowledge was significantly and positively associated with boredom, B = .271, SE = .06, t(237) = 3.80, p <.001, 95% CI [.622, 1.010]. That is, with an increase in experiential self-knowledge and cohesive self-knowledge, boredom also increases. But reflective self-knowledge was significantly and negatively associated with boredom B = -.436, SE = .08, t(237) = -2.35, p < .001, 95% CI [-.805, -.071]. This means that with increasing reflective self-knowledge, boredom decreases (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Sequential
Path Model for Gratitude, Reflective Self-Knowledge, Meaning Presence
and Boredom
p≥ .001** p ≥.05*
As
shown in Table 2, the absolute, relative, and summary fit indices indicated
poor model fit prior to modification. However, following adjustments to the
model, the fit indices improved and reached acceptable levels. After confirming
the model fit, the analysis proceeded to examine the direct and indirect
standardized coefficients. To assess the significance of the indirect paths —specifically,
the effects of gratitude and integrative self-knowledge on boredom through the
mediating role of meaning in life—I used PROCESS Model 4 (Hayes, 2018) with 10,000 bootstraps and a
structural equation model was employed. This model was tested using maximum
likelihood estimation in AMOS-24.
Table 2. Model
Fit Indices
|
Model |
df/X2 |
P |
GFI |
AGFI |
IFI |
TLI |
CFI |
PNFI |
PCFI |
RMSEA |
PCLOSE |
|
Before modification |
2/14 |
0/001 |
0/89 |
0/85 |
0/89 |
0/87 |
0/89 |
0/68 |
0/74 |
0/07 |
0/05 |
|
After modification |
1/86 |
0/001 |
0/91 |
0/87 |
0/92 |
0/90 |
0/92 |
0/68 |
0/74 |
0/60 |
0/10 |
4. Discussion
Boredom is an
uncomfortable experience accompanied by perceptions of meaninglessness (Van
Tilburg and Igou, 2012).
Conversely, gratitude is an inherently pleasant experience that can provide
enhanced meaning in life (Bono and Sender, 2018; McCullough, 2002). When people encounter the meaning
threat associated with boredom, they seek to engage in hedonic and
interpersonal escape behaviors that lower self-awareness and reduce feelings of
meaninglessness (Moynihan et al., 2021). Seib and Vodanovich (1998) and Von Gemmingen
et al. (2003) found that boredom was positively
correlated with ‘self-reflectiveness’ (i.e., attempts at self-understanding—e.g.,
reflecting a lot about oneself).
According to Hypothesis 1, gratitude predicted a
reduction in boredom, but only reflective self-knowledge component of
integrative self-knowledge predicted a reduction in boredom. According to
Hypothesis 2, gratitude and reflective self-knowledge predicted a reduction in
boredom through meaning in life. Among the components of integrative
self-knowledge, experiential self-knowledge did not predict boredom, whereas
reflective and cohesive self-knowledge did—though in opposite directions. The
results showed that among the two components of meaning in life—presence and
search—only the meaning presence directly predicted boredom. Specifically,
higher levels of meaning presence, greater gratitude, and greater reflective
self-knowledge were associated with reduced boredom, while higher cohesive
self-knowledge was associated with increased boredom. Additionally, gratitude,
reflective self-knowledge, and cohesive self-knowledge indirectly affected
boredom through the mediating role of the meaning presence. Individuals with
higher gratitude and reflective self-knowledge tended to report greater meaning
presence, which, in turn, reduced their experience of boredom. Conversely,
those with higher cohesive self-knowledge reported lower meaning presence,
which contributed to greater boredom. Gratitude and reflective self-knowledge
were also found to directly and negatively predict boredom, while cohesive
self-knowledge directly and positively predicted it.
These findings are consistent with those of O’Dea et al.
(2024), who also identified the meaning
presence as a mediating factor in the relationship between gratitude and
boredom. Thus, the present study supports and extends previous research by
confirming that meaning presence serves as a mediator between both gratitude
and reflective self-knowledge and the experience of boredom.
Self-knowledge has been recognized as a source of life
meaning (Bukowski, 2019).
As Schlegel (2009) believes, discovering the self beneath the surface of social conditioning and enables
individuals to find true meaning in their lives. In this context,
self-knowledge provides a crucial foundation for constructing a meaningful
narrative (Schlegel, 2009).
Prior studies also support a negative correlation between self-knowledge and
boredom. The notion that boredom is associated with enhanced self-directed
attention is consistent with neurocognitive research (Bambrah
et al., 2023). For example, mind-wandering and
lapses in attention on behavioral tasks—which are experiences associated with
boredom—are associated with increased activity in the DMN (Buckner et al., 2008; Fox et al., 2015; Gusnard and
Raichle, 2001; Mason et al., 2007), a set of interconnected brain
regions that support internally focused thought (e.g., thinking to oneself).
Indeed, activity in DMN increases when individuals are not engaged in any
externally focused activity or task (Andrews-Hanna, 2012; Buckner et al., 2008; Mason et al., 2007), but decreases when one is actively engaged
in a task and their attention is externally directed (Gusnard
and Raichle, 2001; Ulrich et al., 2014). Experimental work examining the
state of boredom more directly (contrasted with a resting state, an induction
of interest/engagement, and a sustained attention task) found that the
posterior components of the DMN are active during the boredom induction, as
well as that the anterior insular is anti-correlated with the DMN during the
boredom induction, which is indicative of a failure to activate executive
network regions that are necessary for engaging with the external world and
information at hand (Danckert and Isacescu, 2017; Danckert and Merrifield, 2018). Since boredom activates the DMN,
and, in such situations, people are unable to perform external activities despite a strong
desire, the most
effective predictors will be in line of with introspective and self-referential
processes (Menon, 2023),
rather than task-oriented behaviors governed by the CEN )Bigliassi et al., 2025).
Based on cognitive, existential, and neurological
approaches in this study, boredom in adolescents can be predicted through the
interplay of gratitude and reflective self-knowledge, mediated by the meaning
presence. This study also highlights the importance of distinguishing between
the different components of integrative self-knowledge. Among them, only
reflective self-knowledge aligns closely with the experience of boredom, particularly its
neurological dimension. This suggests that including neurophysiological
functions—alongside cognitive and existential approaches—enables the
identification of more accurate and meaningful predictors of boredom.
Ultimately, this study emphasizes that gratitude and reflective self-knowledge,
via the meaning presence, predict reduced boredom.
5. Conclusion
If we are to develop a
solution for boredom based on the function of emotions, we must first
understand the experience of boredom and then identify appropriate predictors
that reduce its experience.
Based
on the three existential, cognitive, and neurological approaches and their
interaction with each other, boredom is a sense of meaninglessness
(existential) in which the person is involved in a cognitive cycle of negative
attention and negative evaluation (cognitive). At the same time, because the DMN network
is also activated in the brain (neurological), the person is unable to perform
external activities, so in such situations the person is bored. Although no
research was found that directly shows which component of meaning in life (presence and search)
activates the brain’s DMN, considering the definitions provided about the
presence and the search for meaning, and also considering the type of activity
of the DMN network, it seems that the presence of meaning—which
indicates whether an individual sees their life as meaningful and purposeful,
and implies some kind of outcome—is more consistent with the activity of
the DMN network whereas the meaning search reflects intensity,
and that active effort of individuals to create or increase their perception of
meaning and purpose in their lives refers to an active and process-oriented
factor associated with the CEN. However, precise proof of this alignment
requires neurological and experimental studies.
In a
cognitive cycle of negative appraisal and inattention, when individuals are no
longer cognitively engaged in a satisfying way, cognitive approach suggests two broad
strategies to restore engagement: one option is to shift to a different topic
or activity in the hope that it will be more fulfilling; the other is to
re-evaluate one’s relationship to the current task or situation to make it more
meaningful. With the descriptions made, the presence of meaning, gratitude and
reflective self-knowledge can be considered a kind of re-evaluation of the
situation. Therefore, among the two cognitive strategies in dealing with
boredom, re-evaluation of the current situation can also be considered in line
with the activity of the DMN network. Of course, this alignment needs to be
confirmed with more precise neurological experiments.
Since
attention to physical symptoms is always of great importance in the treatment
of both physical diseases and mental disorders, the most obvious physical and
bodily manifestation of boredom is the activation of the DMN network. So it seems that ignoring this important symptom in the experience
of boredom is not acceptable. As we know, with increased activity in the DMN
network, a person’s focus on external activity reaches its minimum. In such
circumstances, choosing new external goals and focusing on them does not seem
correct. Perhaps this same effort to engage with external goals caused
Schopenhauer to see life as a pendulum swinging between suffering and boredom.
According
to this study, two examples of predictors that that are in line with the
activity of the DMN network are gratitude and reflective self-knowledge, which,
through the presence of meaning (which is based on evidence in line with the
activity of the DMN network), can predict the reduction of boredom. As in
recent psychological treatments, there is a great emphasis on staying in a
feeling and observing and accepting it, and in fact, acceptance is the
beginning of change. This method can also be used for the emotion of boredom: that is, staying in the current situation and observing
the feeling of boredom and re-evaluating the situation instead of trying to
escape and get rid of boredom. In fact, gratitude and reflective
self-knowledge are forms of staying in the feeling of boredom and re-evaluating
the current situation.
Today,
much research shows, the increasing pace of life, exposure to a high amount of
information but superficial, the importance of time and planning, and, in
general, the era of modernity and its characteristics have caused boredom to
increase sharply. Perhaps in such situations, the body naturally warns the
person by activating the DMN network: where are you going in such a hurry???
5.1. Limitations and
Future Research
Most of the existing
empirical and correlational research has studied boredom in a unidimensional
manner and based on one of the existing theories (existential, cognitive, and
neurological). Now the need to integrate previous findings and conduct research
to integrate different perspectives and their interaction seems essential. In
this regard, the lack of tools (self-assessment and neurological) appropriate
for this purpose is very noticeable. Identifying and studying predictors that
are based on the interaction between different approaches is very necessary in
reducing boredom. Conducting these studies on a larger and more diverse target
populations is very helpful in generalizing the results.
References
Andrews-Hanna,
J. R. (2012). The Brain’s Default Network and Its Adaptive Role in Internal
Mentation. The Neuroscientist, 18(3), 251–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858411403316
Bambrah, V., Moynihan, A., and Eastwood, J. D. (2023). Self-Focused but Lacking
Self-Knowledge: The Relation between Boredom and Self-Perception. Journal of
Boredom Studies, 1. http://doi.org/05281/zenodo.7612324
Bartoli,
E., Devara, E., Dang, H. Q., Rabinovich, R., Mathura, R. K., Anand, A.,
Pascuzzi, B. R., Adkinson, J., Kenett, Y. N., Bijanki,
K. R., Sheth, S. A., and Shofty, B. (2024). Default Mode
Network Electrophysiological Dynamics and Causal Role in Creative Thinking. Brain,
147(10), 3409–3425. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awae199
Bernstein,
H. E. (1975). Boredom and the Ready-Made Life. Social Research, 42(3),
512–537.
Bigliassi, M., Cabral, D. F., and Evans, A. C. (2025). Improving Brain Health Via
the Central Executive Network. The Journal of physiology. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP287099
Biolcati, R., Mancini, G., and Trombini, E. (2017).
Proneness to Boredom and Risk Behaviors During Adolescents’ Free Tim. Psychological
Reports, 121(2), 303–323.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294117724447
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2018.1499350
Brodsky,
J. (1995). In Praise of Boredom. In On Grief and Reason (pp. 104–113).
Harper.
Carlson,
E. N. (2013). Overcoming Barriers to Self-Knowledge: Mindfulness as a Path to Seeing
Yourself as You Really Are. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8,
173–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612462584
Chan,
C. S., Van Tilburg, W. A., Igou, E. R., Poon, C. Y., Tam, K. Y., Wong, V. U., and
Cheung, S. K. (2018). Situational Meaninglessness and State Boredom: Cross-Sectional
and Experience-Sampling Findings. Motivation and Emotion, 42(4),
555–565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-018-9693-3
Csíkszentmihályi, M. (2000). Boredom. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Psychology (pp. 442–444).
Oxford University Press.
Danckert,
J., and Isacescu, J. (2017). The Bored Brain: Insular Cortex and the Default
Mode Network. PsyArXiv Preprints. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-016-4617-5
Danckert, J., and Merrifield, C. (2018). Boredom, Sustained Attention and the Default Mode Network. Experimental Brain Research, 236(9), 2507–2518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-016-4617-5
Doehlemann, M. (1991). Langeweile? Deutung eines verbreiteten Phänomens. Fischer Verlag.
Eastwood,
J., Frischen, A., Fenske, M., and Smilek, D. (2012). The Unengaged Mind: Defining Boredom
in Terms of Attention. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5),
482–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612456044
Elpidorou,
A. (2018). The Good of Boredom. Philosophical Psychology, 31(3),
323–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2017.1346240
Elpidorou,
A. (2023). Boredom and Cognitive Engagement: A Functional Theory of Boredom. Review
of Philosophy and Psychology, 14, 959–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-21-00599-6
https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2009.28.3.307
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5001_2
Finkielsztein, M. (2023). Significance of Boredom: A Literature Review. Journal of
Boredom Studies, 1. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7144313
Flaubert, G. (1980). The
Letters of Gustave Flaubert: 1830-1857. Harvard University Press.
Fox, K. C. R., Spreng, R. N., Ellamil,
M., Andrews-Hanna, J. R., and Christoff, K. (2015). The Wandering Brain:
Meta-Analysis of Functional Neuroimaging Studies of Mind-Wandering and Related
Spontaneous Thought Processes. NeuroImage, 111,
611–621.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.039
Ghorbani,
N. W. (2008). Integrative Self-Knowledge: Correlation and Incremental Validity
of a Cross-Cultural Measure Developed in Iran and United States. Journal of Psychology,
Interdisciplinary and Applied, 142, 395–412. https://doi.org/10.3200/JRPL.142.4.395-412
Gibbons,
F. X. (1983). Self-Attention and Self-Report: The “Veridicality” Hypothesis. Journal
of Personality, 51, 517–542. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00343.x
Goldberg,
Y., Eastwood, J. D., LaGuardia, J., and Danckert, J. (2011). Boredom: An Emotional
Experience Distinct from Apathy, Anhedonia, or Depression. Journal of Social
and Clinical Psychology, 30(6), 647–666. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2011.30.6.647
https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911231161780
Greicius,
M. D., Krasnow, B., Reiss, A. L., and Menon, V. (2003). Functional Connectivity
in the Resting Brain: A Network Analysis of the Default Mode Hypothesis. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 100, 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0135058100
Gusnard, D. A., and Raichle, M. E. (2001). Searching for a Baseline: Functional
Imaging and the Resting Human Brain. Nature Reviews Neurosciences, 2,
685–694.
https://doi.org/10.1038/35094500
Hamilton, V. P. (1990). The Book
of Genesis: Chapters 1–17. Eerdmans.
Hayes,
A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation,
and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. The Guilford Press.
Heidegger, M. (1976). Was ist Metephysik, vol. 9. Wegmarkem.
Katahira, K., Yamazaki, Y., Yamaoka, C., Ozaki, H., Nakagawa, S., and Nagata, N.
(2018). EEG Correlates of the Flow State: A Combination of Increased Frontal Theta
and Moderate Frontocentral Alpha Rhythm in the Mental Arithmetic Task. Frontiers
in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00300
King,
L. A. (2006). Positive Affect and the Experience of Meaning in Life. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.1.179
Kleiman,
E., Adam, L., Kashdan, T., and Riskind, J. (2013). Gratitude and Grit Indirectly
Reduce Risk of Suicidal Ideations by Enhancing Meaning in Life: For a Mediated Moderation
Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 539–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.04.007
Kyeong, S., Kim, J., Kim, D. J., Kim, H. E., and Kim, J.-J. (2017). Effects of Gratitude Meditation on Neural Network Functional Connectivity and Brain-Heart Coupling. Scientific Reports, 7, 5058. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05520-9
Laozi.
(1991). Tao Te Ching. Samuel Weiser.
Lee, F.,
and Zelman, D. (2019). Boredom Proneness as a Predictor of Depression, Anxiety
and Stress: The Moderating Effects of Dispositional Mindfulness. Personality
and Individual Differences, 146, 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.001
Ma, L. K., Tunney, R. J., and
Ferguson, E. (2017). Does Gratitude Enhance Prosociality?
A Meta-Analytic Review. Psychological
Bulletin, 143(6),
601–635.
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000103
Mason,
M. F., Norton, M. I., Van Horn, J. D., Wegner, D. M., Grafton, S. T., and Macrae,
C. N. (2007). Wandering Minds: The Default Network and Stimulus Independent Thought.
Science, 315, 393–395. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1131295
McCullough,
M., Emmons, R., and Tsang, J. (2002). The Grateful Disposition: A Conceptual
and Empirical Topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
82(1), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.112
Menon,
V. (2023). 20 Years of the Default Mode Network: A Review and Synthesis. Neuron, 111(16),
2469–2487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2023.04.023
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.034
Morin,
A. (2017). Toward a Glossary of Self-Related Terms. Frontiers in Psychology,
8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00280
Moynihan,
A. B., Igou, E. R., and Van Tilburg, W. A. (2021). Existential Escape of the
Bored: A Review of Meaning-Regulation Processes under Boredom. European
Review of Social Psychology, 32(1), 161–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2020.1829347
O’Dea,
K., Igou, R., Van Tilburg, W. A., and Kinsella, L. (2022). Self-Compassion
Predicts Less Boredom: The Role of Meaning in Life. Personality and
Individual Differences, 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.padia.2021.11360
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-023-10048-9
Perone, S.,
Weybright, E. H., and Anderson, A. (2019). Over
and Over Again: Changes in Frontal EEG Asymmetry
across a Boring Task. Psychophysiology,
56(10), e13427.
https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13427
Portocarrero, F. F., Gonzalez, K., and Ekema-Agbaw, M. (2020). A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relationship between Dispositional Gratitude and Well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 164, 110101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110101
Ros Velasco, J. (2022). La enfermedad del aburrimiento. Alianza Editorial.
Ros Velasco, J. (2023) Contemporary Myths on
Boredom. Frontiers in Sociology, 8, 1183875. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1183875
Ros Velasco, J.
(2025). The Experience of Boredom in Classical
Contemporaneity. In A. Elpidorou and J. Ros Velasco (Eds.), The History and
Philosophy of Boredom (pp. 208–227). Routledge.
Ros Velasco, J.
(2026). The Disease of Boredom. Princeton University Press.
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0014060.
Schneider,
F., Bermpohl, F., Heinzel, A., Rotte, M., Walter, M., Tempelmann, C., Wiebjing, C., Dobrowolny, H., Heinze, H. J., and Northoff, G. (2008). The Resting Brain and Our Self: Self-Relatedness
Modulates Resting
State Neural Activity in Cortical Midline Structures. Neuroscience, 157, 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.08.014
Seib,
H. M., and Vodanovich, S. J. (1998). Cognitive Correlates of Boredom Proneness:
Role of Private Self-Consciousness and Absorption. The Journal of Psychology,
132(6), 642–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989809599295
Steger,
M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., and Kaler, M. (2006). The Meaning in Life
Questionnaire: Assessing the Presence of and Search for Meaning in Life. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 53, 80–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80
Steger,
M., Kashdan, T., Sullivan, B., and Lorentz, D. (2008). Understanding the Search
for Meaning in Life: Personality, Cognitive Style, and the Dynamic between Seeking
and Experiencing Meaning. Journal of Personality, 76(2), 199–228.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00484.x
Svendsen,
L. (2005). A Philosophy of Boredom. Reaktion Books.
Tabatabaie,
A., Azadehfar, M., Mirian, N., Noroozian, M., and Yoonessi,
A. (2014). Neural Correlates of Boredom in Music Perception. Basic and
Clinical Neuroscience, 5, 259–266.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12618
Todman,
M. (2003). Boredom and Psychotic Disorders: Cognitive and Motivational Issues. Psychiatry,
66(2), 146–167. https://doi.org/10.1521/psyc.66.2.146.20623
Ulrich, M.,
Keller, J., Hoenig, K., Waller, C., and Grön,
G. (2014). Neural Correlates of Experimentally Induced Flow Experiences. NeuroImage, 86, 194–202.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.019
Valéry, P. (1951). Dance and the
Soul. Lehmann.
Van Tilburg, W. A., and Igou, E.
(2011). On Boredom and Social Identity: A Pragmatic Meaning Regulation Approach.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1679–1691. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211418530
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-0119234-9
Van
Tilburg, W. A., and Igou, E. (2017a). Boredom Begs to Differ: Differentiation
from Other Negative Emotion. Emotion, 17(2), 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000233
https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2016.1218925
Van
Tilburg, W. A., Igou, E., and Sedikides, C. (2013). In Search of Meaningfulness:
Nostalgia as an Antidote to Boredom. Emotion, 13(3), 450–461. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030442
Van Tilburg, W. A., Igou, E., Maher, P., Moynihan, A., and Martin, D. (2019). Bored Like Hell: Religiosity Reduces Boredom and Tempers the Quest Meaning. Emotion, 19(2), 255–269. https://doi.org/10.1037//emo0000439
Van Tilburg, W. A., Igou, E. R., and
Panjwani, M. (2022). Boring People: Stereotype Characteristics, Interpersonal
Attributions, and Social Reactions. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 49(9). https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221079104
Von
Gemmingen, M. J., Sullivan, B. F., and Pomerantz, A. M. (2003). Investigating
the Relationships between Boredom Proneness, Paranoia, and Self-Consciousness. Personality
and Individual Differences, 34(6), 907–919. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00219-7
Wangh,
M. (1975). Boredom in Psychoanalytic Perspective. Sociological Research,
42(3), 538– 550.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1727
Whitfield-Gabrieli,
S., Moran, J. M., Nieto-Castanon, A., Triantafyllou, C., Saxe, R., and
Gabrieli, J. D. (2011). Associations and Dissociations between Default and Self-Reference
Networks in the Human Brain. NeuroImage, 55, 225–232.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.048
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.005
Yakobi,
O., Boylan, J., and Danckert, J. (2021). Behavioral and Electroencephalographic
Evidence for Reduced Attentional Control and Performance Monitoring in Boredom.
Psychophysiology, e13816. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13816