Dans notre vie quotidienne, nous commettons un certain nombre d’erreurs qui concerne l’ensemble de nos activités que l’on appelle des défaillances cognitives quotidiennes (DCQ). Elles sont classiquement évaluées par le Cognitive Failure Questionnaire (CFQ) dont les limites (structure factorielle) nécessitent la création d’un nouvel outil. Aussi, cette étude présente la validation de structure d’un nouvel outil d’évaluation, le questionnaire de défaillances cognitives quotidiennes (QDCQ). Après une première étape de réduction des items et une seconde relative aux différentes échelles, nos résultats identifient une structure factorielle unitaire conduisant à privilégier l’hypothèse selon laquelle une défaillance serait la conséquence de dysfonctionnements cognitifs sur des processus spécifiques qui rejaillissent dans les différentes sphères d’activités. Ce questionnaire offre alors de nouvelles perspectives sur le plan de la pratique clinique, en ce qu’il pourrait participer au dépistage précoce de comportements impliqués dans différentes formes de vieillissement cognitif pathologique.

In our daily lives, we make a number of errors and blunders for all our activities. These are the cognitive failures of everyday life, which are conventionally measured by the Cognitive Failure Questionnaire (CFQ). Literature has demonstrated not only that this tool has many limitations especially regarding its factor structure which is not identified by consensus but also that the origin and nature of cognitive failures are not interviewed because they are considered in terms of executive dysfunction. Also, this study will be to describe the various stages of validation structure of a new assessment tool, the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire Daily (questionnaire de défaillances cognitives quotidiennes [QDCQ]) and expose the different levels of analysis of our methodological approach that we have allowed to get it. Therefore, it was administered to 237 all comers people of all ages and proposed them to assess the frequency of cognitive failures over the last 6months. As a result of is a first step in item analysis using indices of normality, of difficulty and discrimination and a second at different scales, we removed twenty-five items out of fifty-two which the statistical power was not sufficient to be kept. We then obtained a new version of QDCQ, which comprises twenty-seven items that apprehend the most cognitive failure's construct. The results of several confirmatory factor analyzes identify a structure with three factors (attention, language and memory) as best fitting our data. That is consistent with the general literature on this construct (Larson et al., 1997Larson G.E., Alderton D.L., Neideffer M., Underhill E. Further evidence on dimensionality and correlates of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire British Journal of Psychology 1997 ;  88 : 29-38 [cross-ref]

Cliquez ici pour aller à la section Références, Wallace, 2004Wallace J.C. Confirmatory factor analysis of the cognitive failures questionnaire: Evidence for dimensionality and construct validity Personality and Individual Differences 2004 ;  37 (2) : 307-324

Cliquez ici pour aller à la section Références), and it tends us to prefer the hypothesis that the occurrence of cognitive failures would be the result of a momentary disruption of specific cognitive processes (probably executive processes which it remains to be defined) that influenced in different spheres of activities. The questionnaire opens new perspectives both in terms of clinical practice, particularly in that it could participate in early detection of several behaviours involved in various forms of pathological cognitive aging such as Alzheimer's disease or Parkinson's. Moreover, conceptually, it could also lead to clarify the relationship that the construct of cognitive failures has with executive functions.