Boredom Series — Episode 10 | 10

In 1986, two American researchers, Richard Farmer and Norman Sundberg, published a tool that would permanently shape research on boredom: the Boredom Proneness Scale, or BPS.

Since then, this instrument has been used in hundreds of studies worldwide, translated into numerous languages, and refined by several research teams.

What the BPS measures is not boredom as a passing state. It is boredom proneness, a relatively stable trait that refers to an individual's tendency to get bored more easily, more intensely, and more frequently than average. This distinction is fundamental for clinical practice.

State vs. Trait: Why the distinction matters

State boredom is contextual and fleeting. It occurs in specific situations and disappears when the situation changes. It is universal and does not indicate anything specific about a person's psychological health.

Trait boredom refers to a stable vulnerability: some people get bored in various contexts, including situations that seem objectively stimulating to others. They struggle to find engaging activities, perceive time as dragging, and experience recurring frustration in their relationship with the environment.

In the literature, this proneness is associated with more depressive and anxious symptoms, self-regulation difficulties, greater vulnerability to behavioral addictions, and certain traits like impulsivity. It represents a clinically relevant indicator—not a diagnosis, but a signal that warrants attention.

The BPS: Structure and Content

The original version of the BPS consists of 28 items, evaluated on a seven-point Likert scale. The items explore two main dimensions:

→ Difficulty engaging in internal activities (thoughts, daydreams, mental activities)

→ Difficulty finding external activities that are sufficiently stimulating

Examples of items (translated and adapted): "It is hard for me to find something interesting to do," "I often find that time passes very slowly," "I am often trapped in situations where I have to do pointless things."

A short 12-item version was developed to facilitate use in clinical settings or rapid research. Validated French versions exist.

Interpretation and Limitations

A high score on the BPS does not constitute a diagnosis. It indicates a vulnerability to be explored within its context. The factors explaining a high score are multiple: attentional difficulties (ADHD), a chronically under-stimulating environment, masked depression, a period of identity transition, or a stable personality trait with no pathological value.

The BPS measures an overall proneness without distinguishing between types of boredom: a limitation that the Multidimensional State Boredom Scale (MSBS) by Fahlman et al. (2013) seeks to overcome, with five subscales: time perception, disengagement, cognitive slowdown, inattention, and lack of meaning.

Clinical Use and Alternatives

For clinicians, the BPS can be useful at the beginning of care to quickly identify boredom proneness as a dimension to explore. It can guide clinical questions:

→ "In which situations do you get bored the most?"

→ "How do you usually react to boredom?"

→ "Are there areas of your life that have felt particularly meaningless to you for a while?"

The MSBS offers finer granularity and is more useful for differentiating various clinical presentations. It is longer (29 items) but more informative in contexts of depression, ADHD, or behavioral addictions.

What changes in practice

The BPS and the MSBS are screening tools, not diagnostic tools. Their use is best complemented by an in-depth interview that contextualizes the scores within the patient's history, resources, and environment.

Integrating an assessment of boredom proneness into the treatment of depression, behavioral addictions, ADHD, or anxiety disorders enriches clinical formulation and can guide specific interventions.

For researchers: the MSBS, due to its granularity, is particularly suited to studies seeking to distinguish boredom subtypes and their differential correlates.

Finally

The BPS has rendered a valuable service to research: it has allowed boredom to be treated as a measurable and clinically relevant variable, rather than as an anecdote or a secondary complaint.

But tools always have limits: they measure what they are asked to measure, and they do not replace the attention given to the uniqueness of each experience.

A patient's boredom proneness is useful data. What this patient does with this boredom, what it hides, what it reveals, what it calls for: that is where real clinical work begins.

End of the Boredom series — 10 episodes. And soon, I hope, a book on the subject... stay tuned ;)