Revisiting the five-facet structure of mindfulness
Open accessAbstract
The current study aimed to replicate the development of the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) in a sample of 399 undergraduate students. We factor analyzed the Mindful Attention and Awareness Questionnaire (MAAS), the Freiburg Mindfulness Scale, the Southampton Mindfulness Questionnaire (SMQ), the Cognitive Affective Mindfulness Scale Revised (CAMS-R), and the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills (KIMS), but also extended the analysis by including a conceptually related measure, the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS), and a conceptually unrelated measure, the Langer Mindfulness Scale (LMS). Overall, we found a partial replication of the five-factor structure, with the exception of non-reacting and non-judging which formed a single factor. The PHLMS items loaded as expected with theoretically related factors, whereas the LMS items emerged as separate factor. Finally, we found a new factor that was mostly defined by negatively worded items indicating possible item wording artifacts within the FFMQ. Our conceptual validation study indicates that some facets of the FFMQ can be recovered, but item wording factors may threaten the stability of these facets. Additionally, measures such as the LMS appear to measure not only theoretically, but also empirically different constructs.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788 · see citing works
The satisfaction with life scale
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 · Cited by 31,768 · see citing works
The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 · Cited by 13,448 · see citing works
Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.130 · Cited by 10,418 · see citing works
A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis
Horn, J. L. (1965) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289447 · Cited by 8,965 · see citing works
Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191105283504 · Cited by 7,511 · cited 19× · see citing works
“We used a shortened version of the FMI; therefore, our current study did not employ the exact measures of the study conducted by Baer et al. (2006).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialMarsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 · Cited by 6,691 · see citing works
New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.-W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010) · Social Indicators Research · doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y · Cited by 4,980 · see citing works
Assessing Reliability and Stability in Panel Models
Wheaton, B., Muthén, B., Alwin, D. F., & Summers, G. F. (1977) · Sociological Methodology · doi:10.2307/270754 · Cited by 3,147 · see citing works
Li, C.-H. (2016) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7 · Cited by 3,031 · see citing works
Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here.
McNeish, D. (2018) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000144 · Cited by 2,533 · see citing works
Assessment of Mindfulness by Self-Report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191104268029 · Cited by 2,298 · see citing works
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000096 · Cited by 2,075 · see citing works
Refining the theory of basic individual values.
Schwartz, S. H., Cieciuch, J., Vecchione, M., Davidov, E., Fischer, R., Beierlein, C., Ramos, A., Verkasalo, M., Lönnqvist, J.-E., Demirutku, K., et al. (2012) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0029393 · Cited by 1,953 · see citing works
Self-citationFeldman, G., Hayes, A., Kumar, S., Greeson, J., & Laurenceau, J.-P. (2007) · Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10862-006-9035-8 · Cited by 1,630 · see citing works
Measuring mindfulness—The Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI)
Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmüller, V., Kleinknecht, N., & Schmidt, S. (2006) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.025 · Cited by 1,475 · see citing works
Trizano-Hermosilla, Í., & Alvarado, J. M. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769 · Cited by 986 · see citing works
The Assessment of Present-Moment Awareness and Acceptance: The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale
Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191107311467 · Cited by 940 · see citing works
Enhancement and denial in socially desirable responding.
Paulhus, D. L., & Reid, D. B. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.307 · Cited by 824 · see citing works
Many Analysts, One Data Set: Making Transparent How Variations in Analytic Choices Affect Results
Silberzahn, R., Uhlmann, E. L., Martin, D. P., Anselmi, P., Aust, F., Awtrey, E. C., Bahník, Š., Bai, F., Bannard, C., Bonnier, E., et al. (2018) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2515245917747646 · Cited by 773 · see citing works
Glorfeld, L. W. (1995) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164495055003002 · Cited by 733 · see citing works
Validation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale in a cancer population
Carlson, L. E., & Brown, K. W. (2005) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2004.04.366 · Cited by 583 · see citing works
Chadwick, P., Hember, M., Symes, J., Peters, E., Kuipers, E., & Dagnan, D. (2008) · British Journal of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466508x314891 · Cited by 517 · see citing works
The Assessment of Mindfulness with Self-Report Measures: Existing Scales and Open Issues
Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0110-9 · Cited by 506 · see citing works
Assessment of Mindfulness: Review on State of the Art
Sauer, S., Walach, H., Schmidt, S., Hinterberger, T., Lynch, S., Büssing, A., & Kohls, N. (2013) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0122-5 · Cited by 464 · see citing works
Gu, J., Strauss, C., Crane, C., Barnhofer, T., Karl, A., Cavanagh, K., & Kuyken, W. (2016) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000263 · Cited by 431 · see citing works
Corr, P., & Cooper, A. (2016) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000273 · Cited by 417 · see citing works
Doing it all Bass-Ackwards: The development of hierarchical factor structures from the top down
Goldberg, L. R. (2006) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2006.01.001 · Cited by 409 · see citing works
Three Concerns With Applying a Bifactor Model as a Structure of Psychopathology
Bonifay, W. E., Lane, S. P., & Reise, S. P. (2016) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702616657069 · Cited by 393 · see citing works
Maydeu‐Olivares, A. (2017) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705511.2016.1269606 · Cited by 386 · see citing works
Williams, M. J., Dalgleish, T., Karl, A., & Kuyken, W. (2014) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/a0035566 · Cited by 321 · see citing works
Measuring Mindfulness: First Steps Towards the Development of a Comprehensive Mindfulness Scale
Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0102-9 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Lilja, J. L., Lundh, L.-G., Josefsson, T., & Falkenström, F. (2013) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0111-8 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Towards A Pan–Cultural Personality Structure: Input from 11 Psycholexical Studies
Raad, B. D., Barelds, D. P. H., Timmerman, M. E., Roover, K. D., Mlačić, B., & Church, A. T. (2014) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.1953 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Pirson, M. A., Langer, E. J., Bodner, T., & Zilcha, S. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2158921 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Pearson, M. R., Lawless, A. K., Brown, D. B., & Bravo, A. J. (2015) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.009 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Aguado, J., Luciano, J. V., Cebolla, A., Serrano-Blanco, A., Soler, J., & García-Campayo, J. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00404 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
Bravo, A. J., Boothe, L. G., & Pearson, M. R. (2015) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-015-0459-7 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Siegling, A. B., & Petrides, K. V. (2014) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01164 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Pirson, M. A., Langer, E., & Zilcha, S. (2018) · Journal of Adult Development · doi:10.1007/s10804-018-9282-4 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Dam, N. T. V., Hobkirk, A. L., Danoff‐Burg, S., & Earleywine, M. (2012) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191112438743 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
A Concise History of New Zealand
Smith, P. M. (2011) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139196574 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Userfriendlyscience (UFS)Preprint
Peters, G.-J. (2017) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.17605/osf.io/txequ · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Siegling, A. B., & Petrides, K. V. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153073 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Blasberg, S. A., Rogers, K. H., & Paulhus, D. L. (2013) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1080/00223891.2013.862252 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Interesting and impactful research: on phenomena, theory, and writing
Tellis, G. J. (2016) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-016-0499-0 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Back to the phenomena: Theory, methods, and statistics in psychological research
Magnusson, D. (1992) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2410060102 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Factors of values in the Dutch Language and their relationship to factors of personality
Raad, B. D., & van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2007) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.667 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Raad, B. D., & van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2010) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.777 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
The Unobtrusive Tactics of Religious Movements
Kucinskas, J. (2014) · Sociology of Religion · doi:10.1093/socrel/sru055 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Emerging understandings of mindfulness through experiential awareness
Higgins, J., & Eden, R. (2018) · Learning Research and Practice · doi:10.1080/23735082.2018.1428144 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Kucinskas, J. (2018). The mindful elite : mobilizing from the inside out. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Preliminary validation of the Cognitive Affective Mindfulness Scale–Revised in cancer populations
Snyder, S., Secinti, E., Chinh, K., Wu, W., Johns, S. A., & Mosher, C. E. (2024) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.6260 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“Although self - report measures of mindfulness have been developed, 9 few of these measures have shown evidence of reliability and validity in cancer populations, nor have they been examined for psychometric equivalence across subpopulations.”
BackgroundMethod
- Authors
- Karl, J. A., & Fischer, R.
- Affiliations
- Victoria University of Wellington (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Karl, Johannes Alfons
- Venue
- Measurement Instruments for the Social Sciences
- Published
- 2020-05-24
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2523-8930 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3031570449
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3
- FWCI
- 0.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Measurement Instruments for the Social Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Dublin City University Open Access Institutional Repository (Dublin City University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsychOpen Gold (Leibniz Institute for Psychology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- 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 › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
- Keywords
- Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, replication, factor structure, non-judgment, undergraduate students
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
