The Memory Compensation Questionnaire (MCQ) is a psychometrically sound instrument that assesses the variety and extent to which an individual compensates for actual or perceived memory losses. Until now, only an English version of the MCQ has been psychometrically evaluated. The aim of the present study was to establish a Dutch version of the MCQ and evaluate its psychometric properties. The MCQ data of N = 556 cognitively healthy adults (61.8% females) aged between 50.1 and 95.3 years (M = 73.9 years, SD = 8.0) were analyzed. The results showed that the factor structure of the Dutch version of the MCQ corresponded well with that of the English version of the MCQ. The reliabilities of the scales of the Dutch version of the MCQ were all high (all Cronbach’s αs ≥ .77). Demographic variables (especially age and gender) affected most of the MCQ scale scores. Regression-based normative data that take these demographic influences into account were established, and a user-friendly computer program was provided to facilitate the scoring and norming of the MCQ.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
2.
BäckmanL.DixonR. A. (1992). Psychological compensation: A theoretical framework. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 259-283.
3.
BelsleyD. A.KuhE.WelschR. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York, NY: Wiley.
4.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
5.
BentlerP. M.BonettD. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
6.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21, 230-258.
7.
CapitaniE. (1997). Normative data and neuropsychological assessment. Common problems in clinical practice and research. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 7, 295-309.
8.
CraikF. I. M.SalthouseT. A. (2000). The handbook of aging and cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
CrawfordJ. R.HowellD. C. (1998). Comparing an individual’s test score against norms derived from small samples. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 12, 482-486.
10.
De BieS. E. (1987). Standaardvragen 1987: Voorstellen voor uniformering van vraagstellingen naar achtergrondkenmerken en interviews [Standard questions 1987: Proposal for uniformization of questions regarding background variables and interviews]. Leiden, The Netherlands: Leiden University Press.
11.
de FriasC. M.DixonR. A. (2005). Confirmatory factor structure and measurement invariance of the Memory Compensation Questionnaire. Psychological Assessment, 17, 168-178.
12.
de FriasC. M.DixonR. A.BäckmanL. (2003). Use of memory compensation strategies is related to psychosocial and health indicators. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 58, 12-22.
13.
DixonR. A.BäckmanL. (1992-1993). The concept of compensation in cognitive aging: the case of prose processing in adulthood. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 36, 199-217.
14.
DixonR. A.BäckmanL. (Eds.). (1995). Compensating for psychological deficits and declines: Managing lossess and promoting gains. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
DixonR. A.de FriasC. M. (2007). Mild memory deficits differentially affect six-year changes in compensatory strategy use. Psychology and Aging, 22, 632-638.
16.
DixonR. A.de FriasC. M.BäckmanL. (2001). Characteristics of self-reported memory compensation in older adults. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 23, 650-661.
17.
DixonR. A.HultschD. F. (1983). Structure and development of metamemory in adulthood. Journal of Gerontology, 38, 682-688.
18.
FloydF. J.WidamanK. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7, 286-299.
HoppG. A. (1993). A longitudinal study of the cognitive performance of healthy and demented very old adults (Unpublished master’s thesis), University of Victoria, Victorial, British Columbia, Canada.
21.
La RueA. (1992). Aging and neuropsychological assessment. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
22.
LezakM. D.HowiesonD. B.LoringD. W. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment (4th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
MitrushinaM. N.BooneK. B.D’EliaL. F. (1999). Handbook of normative data for neuropsychological assessment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
25.
MolM. E.RuiterR. A.VerheyF. R.DijkstraJ.JollesJ. (2008). A study into the psychosocial determinants of perceived forgetfulness: implications for future interventions. Aging and Mental Health, 12, 167-176.
26.
Paganini-HillA.ClarkL. J. (2007). Preliminary assessment of cognitive function in older adults by clock drawing, box copying and narrative writing. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 23, 74-81.
27.
Paganini-HillA.ClarkL. J.HendersonV. W.BirgeS. J. (2001). Clock drawing: Analysis in a retirement community. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 49, 941-947.
28.
PondsR. W.CommissarisK. J.JollesJ. (1997). Prevalence and covariates of subjective forgetfulness in a normal population in the Netherlands. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 45, 207-221.
29.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
30.
UNESCO. (1976). International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED). Paris, France: Author.
31.
UnverzagtF. W.KastenL.JohnsonK. E.RebokG. W.MarsiskeM.KoepkeK. M.. . . TennstedtS. L. (2007). Effect of memory impairment on training outcomes in ACTIVE. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 953-960.
32.
Van BreukelenG. J. P.VlaeyenJ. W. S. (2005). Norming clinical questionnaires with multiple regression: The Pain Cognition List. Psychological Assessment, 17, 336-344.
33.
Van der ElstW. (2006). The neuropsychometrics of aging: Normative studies in the Maastricht Aging Study. Maastricht, The Netherlands: Neuropsy.
34.
Van der ElstW.Van BoxtelM. P. J.Van BreukelenG. J. P.JollesJ. (2005). Rey’s Verbal Learning Test: Normative data for 1,855 healthy participants aged 24-81 years and the influence of age, sex, education, and mode of presentation. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 11, 290-302.
35.
Van der ElstW.Van BoxtelM. P. J.Van BreukelenG. J. P.JollesJ. (2006). The Stroop Color-Word Test: Influence of age, sex, and education; and normative data for a large sample across the adult age range. Assessment, 13, 62-79.
36.
Van der ElstW.Van BoxtelM. P. J.Van BreukelenG. J. P.JollesJ. (2007). Assessment of information processing in working memory in applied settings: The paper and pencil memory scanning test. Psychological Medicine, 37, 1335-1344.
37.
Van der ElstW.Van BoxtelM. P. J.Van BreukelenG. J. P.JollesJ. (2008). Assessment of change in performance on the Stroop Color-Word Test, Verbal Learning Test of Rey, and Letter Digit Substitution Test after a test-retest interval of three years: The regression-based change approach. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 14, 71-80.
