Why Do We Have Internal Dialogues? Development and Validation of the Functions of Dialogues–Revised Questionnaire (FUND-R)

Abstract

People are often engaged in internal dialogues. It means that they adopt (at least) two different viewpoints and the utterances formulated (silently or aloud) from these viewpoints respond to one another. Internal dialogues fulfill several important functions. However, this complexity has not been reflected in how the functions of internal dialogues are measured and investigated. To provide a more nuanced picture of the functions of internal dialogues, we developed the Functions of Dialogues–Revised Questionnaire (FUND-R). Study 1 aimed to explore (n = 248) and confirm (n = 538) the internal structure of the FUND-R. Study 2 (n = 341) was designed to reconfirm this structure and examine reliability and validity of the method. In Study 1 the FUND-R has been confirmed to have six subscales, measuring six functions of internal dialogues: Analyzing, Bonding, Self-Knowing, Fantasizing, Ruminating, and Testing. Study 2 reconfirmed the structure and revealed high reliability and validity of the FUND-R. Validity was assessed via convergence with personality traits, two types of self-attentiveness, and stress-coping styles. The analysis of criterion validity also included comparison of FUND-R scores across different interlocutors, and situations discussed in dialogues. The FUND-R has been confirmed as a reliable and valid measure of functions of internal dialogues for use in research settings.

Keywords:

• Dialogical Self Theory (DST)
• internal dialogue
• functions of internal dialogue
• the Functions of Dialogues – Revised Questionnaire (FUND-R)

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The Research Ethics Committee at The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin approved the study.