MMQ之優點依據過去文獻大致可分為五大方向及一綜合描述：
一、
面向獨特性：
1. Some aspects of meta-memory are not addressed at all in the existing
questionnaires; for example, although there are subscales assessing anxiety
about memory (e.g., Dixon et al., 1988), there are no scales assessing other common emotional
reactions to memory, such as frustration, irritation, unhappiness, or
pleasure [1].
2. The Contentment
scale of the MMQ includes items pertaining to aspects of memory related
affect, which are not typically included in existing questionnaires [1, 3].
3. The MMQ includes items pertaining to aspects of memory-related affects, not typically
included in existing questionnaires [1].
4. The MMQ distinguishes
between the report of memory failures and worries or discontentment with
one’s memory function, it would also be interesting to test whether some of the
patients might be characterized by dissociations between these two subscales,
e.g., reporting lots of memory worries and discontentment (MMQ contentment) in
combination with a normal report of daily memory failures (MMQ ability). Demonstrating
such a discrepancy could be of direct therapeutic value [4].
5. The MMQ Contentment scale was selected in particular because of the high
correspondence between content areas included on the scale that measure memory satisfaction
(i.e., normative comparisons, emotional reactions, and memory self-efficacy)
and components of the
psychoeducational intervention (i.e., patient education about cognitive
function, management of distress over CRCD symptoms, and provision of cognitive
strategies) [5].
二、 多面向(multidimensionality)：
1. Comprehensive measures (i.e. including aspects of subjective memory capacity and memory-related anxiety, etc.) were preferred over measures assessing only a single aspect of subjective memory (e.g.,‘memory decline index’) [2].
三、
臨床相關/適用性(clinical relevance)：
1. Additional items pertaining to contentment with one’s memory, which is relevant to clinical intervention, are not included in current measures [1].
2. Some of these questionnaires were developed primarily for research use, the items
included do not necessarily reflect aspects of memory that are amenable to
clinical memory intervention. For example, items concerning self-evaluation of
past memory ability and those involving memory for very remote events would not
reflect typical targets of clinical interventions [1, 3].
3. Clinical interventions tend to focus on problems with recent memory
(e.g., remembering new names) and on strategies relevant to everyday life
(e.g., repetition, written aids) [1].
4. Several such self-report questionnaires have been developed but some of
them only assess
frequency of forgetting and memory abilities in everyday life (e.g., Inventory
of Memory Experiences), whereas others primarily focus on self-evaluation of
past memory and do not explore recent memories or strategies relevant to
everyday life, which are among possible targets of clinical intervention [1, 6].
四、
題目設計合適性：
1. Several of the questionnaires
include items that are not applicable to some individuals, such as public speaking, reading novels,
driving, or working. It can be difficult to interpret the results of a
questionnaire when not all items are answered [1, 7].
五、
題目數量：
1. Some questionnaires, such as the MIA, contain a very large number of items and
are time consuming.
The considerable amount of time required to complete such a questionnaire could
adversely affect compliance,
especially in older or cognitively impaired individuals [1].
2. Comprehensive questionnaires, assessing different aspects of meta-memory,
are often very time
consuming (e.g., Meta-memory in Adulthood, MIA) [3, 6].
六、
整體性評論：
1. The MMQ is an improvement over other memory self-report instruments
because it encompasses a number of features in combination (i.e., multidimensionality, clinical
relevance, brevity, and ease of administration) that are found only
partially in any single existing questionnaire [1].
2. The MMQ can be considered an improvement over other memory self-report
instruments because it embodies a number of features in combination: multidimensionality, clinical relevance, brevity and ease of administration.
Moreover, the questionnaire includes items pertaining to aspects of
memory-related affects, not typically included in existing questionnaires [3].
1. Troyer AK, Rich JB: Psychometric properties of a new metamemory
questionnaire for older adults. J
Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2002, 57(1):P19-27.
2. Metternich B, Kosch D, Kriston L, Harter M,
Hull M: The effects of
nonpharmacological interventions on subjective memory complaints: a systematic
review and meta-analysis. Psychotherapy
and psychosomatics 2010, 79(1):6-19.
3. Simon SS, Avila RT, Vieira G, Bottino CMC: Metamemory and aging: Psychometric
properties of the Brazilian version of the Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire
for elderly. Dement Neuropsychol 2016,
10(2):113-126.
4. van der Werf SP, Vos SH: Memory worries and self-reported daily forgetfulness: a psychometric
evaluation of the Dutch translation of the Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire.
Clin Neuropsychol 2011, 25(2):244-268.
5. Bernstein LJ, McCreath GA, Nyhof-Young J,
Dissanayake D, Rich JB: A brief
psychoeducational intervention improves memory contentment in breast cancer
survivors with cognitive concerns: results of a single-arm prospective study.
Support Care Cancer 2018, 26(8):2851-2859.
6. Raimo S, Trojano L, Siciliano M, Cuoco S,
D'Iorio A, Santangelo F, Abbamonte L, Grossi D, Santangelo G: Psychometric properties of the Italian
version of the multifactorial memory questionnaire for adults and the elderly.
Neurological sciences : official journal
of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical
Neurophysiology 2016, 37(5):681-691.
7. Riffo B, Reyes F, Veliz M: Psychometric properties of multifactorial
memory questionnaire in Chilean adult population. Terapia Psicologica 2013, 31(2):227-237.
