Cited by 140Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

Five facets mindfulness questionnaire—reliability and factor structure: a Swedish version

Lilja, Josefine L., Frodi-Lundgren, Annika, Hanse, Jan Johansson, Josefsson, Torbjörn, Lundh, Lars-Gunnar, Sköld, Camilla, Hansen, Erling, Broberg, Anders G.·2011·Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

Abstract

Two studies were conducted to assess the Swedish version of the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), which was originally created by Baer et al. (2006). The aim of Study 1 was to examine the psychometric properties of the FFMQ using data from 495 individuals. Quantitative and qualitative analyses resulted in a reduction of the scale by 10 items. Psychometric properties, including internal consistency of the revised instrument, were examined. The Swedish FFMQ provides results comparable to those obtained by Baer. Cronbach's alphas were high for all the facets. The Swedish FFMQ appears to be a potentially useful tool in measuring mindfulness among Swedish participants. The aim of Study 2 was to test the suggested hierarchical five-factor solution and construct validity, using a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Similar to findings for the English version of the FFMQ, the CFA showed that the Observing facet was not a significant part of an overall self-reported mindfulness structure in a Swedish population with little meditation experience.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/16506073.2011.580367

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lilja, J. L., Frodi-Lundgren, A., Hanse, J. J., Josefsson, T., Lundh, L.-G., Sköld, C., Hansen, E., & Broberg, A. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
  • Halmstad University (SE)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Danderyds sjukhus (SE)
Corresponding author
Lilja, Josefine L.
Venue
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Published
2011-12
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
291-303
ISSN
  • 1650-6073 (ISSN-L)
  • 1651-2316
OpenAlex
W2064472532
Cited by
140
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
mindfulness, Swedish translation, psychometric properties, factor structure, construct validity, internal consistency, meditation experience, cross-cultural adaptation
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors, Sweden, Translating, Reproducibility of Results, Meditation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review