Cited by 12Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

When ‘negativity’ becomes obstructive: a novel exploration of the two-factor model of the Self-Compassion Scale and a comparison of self-compassion and self-criticism interventions

Open access
Mantzios, Michail, Koneva, Anastasija, Egan, Helen·2020·Current Issues in Personality Psychology

Abstract

Background: Self-compassion is a tendency to respond to personal feelings of distress in a kind and understanding way, and to become aware that facing difficulties and adversity is part of a common human experience that is shared by all hu-mans. The Self Compassion Scale (SCS) includes negative items measuring self-judgement, isolation and over-identification, which are at the opposite end of the spectrum to self-kindness, common humanity and mindfulness. Some researchers have argued that the link between self-compassion and psychopathology is inflated by the inclu-sion of these negative items. Moving away from factorial structures and advanced statistics used in recent research, we present a different way of exploring the conceptualisation of self-compassion theory and the way it is measured. Participants and procedure: Study 1 set out to support the inclusion (or exclusion) of the negative items within the SCS, by investigating the cor-relation between the negative items and the positive items altered to reflect the exact opposite of the original posi-tive items of the scale (i.e., self-unkindness, disjointed humanity, and mindlessness). Study 2 was an experiment exploring differences between self-compassion and self-criticism 5-minute interventions on state self-compassion, state mindfulness and state anxiety. The interventions were separated to represent the positive or negative ele-ments, rather than a mixture of the interventions. Results: If the main argumentation against the use of the overall score of the self-compassion scale is the inflation of the neg-ative items, then the results support the inclusion of the negative items within the SCS, as the altered positive items show a similar inflation to the original negative items when observing a significant positive relationship. No differ-ences were found between the two interventions and the overall scores; nevertheless, mindfulness and self-judgment subscales appeared to significantly change only for the self-compassion group. Conclusions: While the debate around the self-compassion scale continues, the literature emphasizing self-criticism does not translate into inflation as suggested, and does not propose effective practices. Explanations of findings, limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In two studies, reversing the SCS positive items produced negative items that correlated strongly with the original negative items, supporting inclusion of negative SCS items, while a brief self-compassion intervention and a self-criticism-reduction intervention did not differ overall on state self-compassion, mindfulness, or anxiety. Subscale analyses showed mindfulness and self-judgment changed significantly only in the self-compassion condition.

Key findings

  • Study 1: original positive subscales correlated negatively with original negative subscales (r = -.69, n = 155, p < .001) and with altered negative subscales (r = -.68, p < .001); original negative and altered negative subscales correlated positively (r = .72, p < .001).
  • Study 2: no significant intervention effects on state mindfulness, state self-compassion, or state anxiety; Time × Group ANOVAs were non-significant for these overall measures (e.g., state mindfulness F = 0.34, p = .565; state self-compassion F = 2.03, p = .158; state anxiety F = 0.15, p = .697).
  • State anxiety decreased significantly in the self-compassion condition (pre 12.63 to post 11.38, ΔM = -1.25, t = 2.16, p = .037) but only marginally in the self-criticism condition (pre 11.25 to post 10.30, ΔM = -0.95, t = 1.89, p = .067).
  • Subscale follow-ups: mindfulness increased significantly only in the self-compassion condition (t(78) = 2.99, ΔM = -1.00, p = .004; criticism condition t(78) = 0.82, ΔM = 0.27, p = .413), and self-judgment decreased significantly only in the self-compassion condition (t(78) = 3.16, ΔM = 1.60, p = .002; criticism condition t(78) = 0.53, ΔM = 0.53, p = .304). Isolation, common humanity, and self-kindness changed similarly in both conditions.

Methods

  • Study 1: correlational design; 155 undergraduate students from a university in England (141 females, 14 males; mean age 20.56, SD = 2.86); completed the original 26-item SCS plus 13 altered negative items created by reversing positive SCS items; Pearson correlations compared original positive, original negative, and altered subscales.
  • Study 2: experimental pre-post design; 80 psychology undergraduates (76 females, 4 males; mean age 21.66, SD = 5.07), allocated to a 5:11 Self-Compassion Break or a 5:21 Eliminating Self-Criticism Break (40 per condition); state self-compassion, state mindfulness, and state anxiety measured before and after.
  • Main analysis: three 2 (Condition) × 2 (Time) mixed ANOVAs on overall state self-compassion, state mindfulness, and state anxiety, plus similar analyses on SCS subscales and follow-up repeated-measures t-tests.

Limitations

  • Stated: recruitment through a university Research Participation Scheme with credits may negatively influence participants and motivation; Study 2 priming was undermined because all participants were psychology undergraduates and over 80% reported familiarity with self-compassion, making understanding more similar across conditions than intended; future research should use a pre-intervention knowledge test and larger samples.
  • Stated: Study 2 used short interventions; future research could test longer meditation durations, though prolonged self-criticism-reduction interventions may be ethically problematic.
  • Evident in text: both samples were predominantly female undergraduates from one university, limiting generalizability; outcomes relied on self-report state measures, and Study 2 had no follow-up beyond immediate post-intervention.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5114/cipp.2020.100791

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

7 of 26 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Interpretationcitation

    The present findings are consistent with the systematic review and meta-analysis finding that self-compassion interventions improve self-compassion and psychopathology but not over and beyond other interventions.

    “Conversely, the findings could be explained through a recent systematic review and meta-analysis that highlighted selfcompassion interventions improving self-compassion and psychopathology, but not over and beyond other interventions (Wilson, Mackintosh, Power, & Chan, 2019), which is consistent with the present findings.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wilson, Mackintosh, Power, & Chan, 2019 source
  • Findingown data

    In the Compassion Condition, state isolation was significantly reduced from pre- to post-intervention, t(78) = 2.54, ΔM = 1.05, p = .013.

    “For the Compassion Condition, isolation was significantly reduced from pre-to post-intervention measurements, t(78) = 2.54, ΔM = 1.05, p = .013.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the Compassion Condition, state self-judgment significantly decreased from pre- to post-intervention, t(78) = 3.16, ΔM = 1.60, p = .002.

    “Similarly, self-judgment significantly decreased for the Compassion Condition, t(78) = 3.16, ΔM = 1.60, p = .002”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the Compassion Condition, state Self-Kindness significantly increased from pre- to post-intervention, t(78) = 5.62, ΔM = -2.37, p < .001.

    “Self-Kindness for the Compassion Condition displayed a significant increase t(78) = 5.62, ΔM = -2.37,p < .001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In Study 2, the mindfulness and self-judgment subscales appeared to significantly change only for the self-compassion group.

    “nevertheless, mindfulness and selfjudgment subscales appeared to significantly change only for the self-compassion group.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 25
  • May combine two claims. 31
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 5
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Researchers have suggested that the negative items of the Self-Compassion Scale correlate more with psychopathology, leading to the conclusion that positive and negative items should be investigated separately because the negative items inflate the relationships observed.

    “Specifically, researchers suggested that the negative items correlate more with psychopathology, which led them to the conclusion that positive and negative items should be investigated separately, as the negative items inflate the relationships observed (López et al., 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites López et al., 2015 source

      Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A recent systematic review and meta-analysis found that self-compassion interventions improve self-compassion and psychopathology, but not over and beyond other interventions.

    “a recent systematic review and meta-analysis that highlighted selfcompassion interventions improving self-compassion and psychopathology, but not over and beyond other interventions (Wilson, Mackintosh, Power, & Chan, 2019)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wilson, Mackintosh, Power, & Chan, 2019 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    There have been indications that reward for participation in psychological studies may negatively influence participants and their motivation to engage with the task at hand.

    “There have been indications that reward for participation in psychological studies may negatively influence participants and motivation to engage with the task at hand (Jovanovic & Matejevic, 2014;Sharp, Pelletier, & Levesque, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Jovanovic & Matejevic, 2014 source

      Section 2 reports a slight decrease in time spent on a task after a reward was given for participating in that task, and discusses possible reductions in intrinsic motivation. It does not establish that rewards for participating in psychological studies have this effect; that is a different condition from rewarding participation in the task itself. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Sharp, Pelletier, & Levesque, 2006 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Previous research indicated that positive and negative items within the SCS represent separate concepts, because negative items have a stronger association with psychopathology.

    “Previous research indicated that positive and negative items within the scale represent separate concepts, because negative items have a stronger association with psychopathology (e.g.López et al., 2018;Muris & Petrocchi, 2016).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites López et al., 2018 source
    • cites Muris & Petrocchi, 2016 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The culture of the West teaches people to associate self-compassion with passivity or weakness and to confuse the concept with self-indulgence or self-pity, rather than a healthier perspective of oneself able to battle psychopathology.

    “The culture of the West teaches people to associate self-compassion with passivity or weakness and to confuse the concept with self-indulgence or self-pity, rather than a healthier perspective of oneself that is able to battle psychopathology (Egan & Mantzios, 2018;Mantzios & Egan, 2017;Neff & Dahm, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Egan & Mantzios, 2018 source

      The Discussion (page not provided) reports that participants associated self-kindness with self-indulgence, and the Introduction says self-kindness can alleviate psychological distress. The paper does not establish that Western culture teaches people to see self-compassion as weakness or passivity, nor does it address confusion with self-pity or a general ability to combat psychopathology. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Mantzios & Egan, 2017 source

      The ‘Differentiating between self-compassion and self-kindness’ section (page unavailable) says people confuse self-compassion with self-kindness and describes indulgent acts that some people consider kind to themselves. It does not say Western culture teaches this confusion or associates self-compassion with passivity, weakness, or self-pity. The paper discusses alleviating psychological distress, but does not make the claimed point about battling psychopathology. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Neff & Dahm, 2015 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In Study 2, the effects of the intervention on state mindfulness, state self-compassion, and state anxiety were non-significant.

    “The analyses revealed that the effects of the intervention on state mindfulness, on state selfcompassion, and on state anxiety were non-significant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In Study 2, state anxiety appeared to reach significance in the Self-Compassion Condition, while the Self-Criticism Condition marginally failed.

    “although state anxiety appeared to reach significance in the Self-Compassion Condition, while the Self-Criticism Condition marginally failed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In Study 2, there were no significant differences between the intervention types and between genders at baseline measurements.

    “There were no significant difference between the intervention types and between genders at baseline measurements.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For isolation, Common Humanity and Self-Kindness, there were no differences between the Compassion and Criticism Conditions.

    “Up to this point, there were no differences between the two conditions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both interventions decreased state self-judgment, but the decrease was significant only for the self-compassion intervention, not for the self-criticism intervention.

    “With self-judgment, both interventions decreased self-judgment, but the selfcompassionate intervention decreased self-judgment significantly, while the self-criticism intervention did not reach significance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The second hypothesis was confirmed, but not to the extent that was expected.

    “The second hypothesis was also confirmed, but not to the extent that was expected.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both interventions were equally effective at increasing overall state self-compassion and state mindfulness and decreasing state anxiety scores.

    “Both interventions were equally effective at increasing the overall state self-compassion and state mindfulness and decreasing state anxiety scores”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    State mindfulness significantly increased in the self-compassion intervention while decreasing non-significantly in the self-criticism intervention.

    “Mindfulness significantly increased in the self-compassion intervention, while decreasing in the self-criticism, non-significantly.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The Self-Compassion Scale appears to be an appropriate measure as suggested by Neff (2003b), because the observed relationships between original positive, original negative, and altered subscales were as predicted.

    “The SCS appears to be an appropriate measure as suggested by Neff (2003b), as the relationships appeared to be as predicted.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Neff (2003b)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The results support the inclusion of the negative items within the Self-Compassion Scale, because the altered positive items show a similar inflation to the original negative items when observing a significant positive relationship.

    “If the main argumentation against the use of the overall score of the self-compassion scale is the inflation of the negative items, then the results support the inclusion of the negative items within the SCS, as the altered positive items show a similar inflation to the original negative items when observing a significant positive relationship.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Preliminary analysis in Study 2 showed no violation of assumptions (Levene's test of equality of error variances > .05 and Box's test of equality of covariance matrices > .001).

    “Preliminary analysis showed no violation of assumptions (i.e., Levene's test of equality of error variances > .05 and Box's test of equality of covariance matrices > .001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 1, the Cronbach's α for the original Self-Compassion Scale was .95.

    “In the current study the Cronbach's α was .95.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 2, the State Anxiety Inventory - Short Form had a Cronbach's α of .87 prior to intervention and .88 after intervention.

    “The scale was administered both prior to (Cronbach's α = .87)and after intervention (Cronbach's α = .88)to measure the changes in anxiety of participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The self-compassion and self-criticism interventions do not differ in the way they influence state self-compassion, state mindfulness and state anxiety, although state anxiety appeared to reach significance in the Self-Compassion Condition while the Self-Criticism Condition marginally failed.

    “Therefore, the self-compassion and self-criticism interventions do not differ in the way they influence state self-compassion, state mindfulness and state anxiety, although state anxiety appeared to reach significance in the Self-Compassion Condition, while the Self-Criticism Condition marginally failed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The literature emphasizing self-criticism does not translate into inflation as suggested, and does not propose effective practices.

    “While the debate around the self-compassion scale continues, the literature emphasizing self-criticism does not translate into inflation as suggested, and does not propose effective practices.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Tóth-Király et al. (2017) examined the factor structure in a large international investigation of 20 samples (N = 11,685), where each sample provided support for the use of the original six subscales and the total SCS score, but not the two-factor model.

    “Tóth-Király et al. (2017) examined the factor structure in a large international investigation of 20 samples (N = 11,685), where each sample provided support for the use of the original six subscales and the total SCS score, but not the two-factor model.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tóth-Király et al., 2017

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Suppression leads to more thoughts and more distress, while acceptance of thoughts leads to fewer thoughts, as well as lower levels of depression and anxiety.

    “research has indicated that suppression leads to more thoughts and more distress, while acceptance of thoughts leads to fewer thoughts, as well as lower levels of depression and anxiety (Marcks & Woods, 2005).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Marcks & Woods, 2005 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 2, gender differences were explored, and data were reanalysed by excluding males, and similar comparisons were performed with (un)familiarity of self-compassion and experiences in meditation, all of which indicated the same pattern or non-significant differences.

    “Gender differences were explored, and data were reanalysed by excluding males, and similar comparisons were performed with (un)familiarity of self-compassion and experiences in meditation, all of which indicated the same pattern or non-significant differences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 1, the Cronbach's α for the altered self-compassion negative sub-scales was .84.

    “In the current study the Cronbach's α was .84.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Ethical approval for Study 1 was provided by the university's Psychology Department Ethics Committee.

    “Ethical approval for this study was provided by the university's Psychology Department Ethics Committee.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 2, the State Mindfulness Scale had a Cronbach's α of .95 prior to intervention and .95 after intervention.

    “This scale was used to measure participants' awareness of present experiences prior to (Cronbach's α = .95)and after intervention (Cronbach's α = .95).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 2, every second participant was allocated to the self-criticism condition, and each condition consisted of 40 participants.

    “Every second participant was allocated to the self-criticism condition, and each condition consisted of 40 participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Ethical approval for Study 2 was provided by the university's Psychology Department Ethics Committee.

    “Ethical approval for this study was provided by the university's Psychology Department Ethics Committee.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 2, the state self-compassion scale had a Cronbach's α of .88 prior to intervention and .83 after intervention.

    “This scale was used to measure state self-compassion of participants prior to (Cronbach's α = .88)and after intervention (Cronbach's α = .83).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Preliminary analysis in Study 1 showed that all assumptions were met to conduct a bivariate correlation.

    “Preliminary analysis showed that all assumptions were met to conduct a bivariate correlation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The Self-Compassion Scale appears to represent a valid construct, although replication of the present findings is warranted.

    “For now, it appears as if the self-compassion scale represents a valid construct, although replication of the present findings is warranted.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Study 1, the Cronbach's α for the combined scale was .95.

    “In the current study the Cronbach's α was .95 for the combined scale.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The inclusion of the negative components of the Self-Compassion Scale for the reduction of response bias appears appropriate, given the significant positive relationship between altered and original negative items and the significant negative relationships between original positive items and both original negative and altered items.

    “Specifically, the inclusion of the negative components for the reduction of response bias appears appropriate, as there is a significant positive relationship between A items and O-items, and the O+ items significantly relate negatively to both O-and A, a relationship that appears marginally the same.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Without follow-up investigations, the conclusion that can be drawn from Study 2 is only that the positive item intervention brings about positive changes to both positive and negative factors, but not over and beyond what would be expected.

    “Without any follow-up investigations, the conclusion that can be drawn from Study 2 may only be that the positive item intervention brings about positive changes to both positive and negative factors, but not over and beyond what would be expected.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Negative and positive components of the SCS, while opposites that relate differently to other constructs, are interrelated parts of an overall concept of self-compassion.

    “Study 1 supports the understanding that while negative and positive components might be opposites and relate differently to other constructs, they are interrelated parts of an overall concept of self-compassion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The altered subscale, formed by rephrasing the positive SCS items as their exact polar opposites, validly represents the content of the original negative SCS items.
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    All participants were psychology undergraduates, and over 80% reported being familiar with the concept of self-compassion.

    “However, all of the participants were psychology undergraduates, and over 80% of the participants reported being familiar with the concept of self-compassion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    From an ethical viewpoint, the use of decreasing self-criticism for prolonged periods and interventions may be problematic.

    “although from an ethical viewpoint the use of decreasing self-criticism for prolonged periods and interventions may be problematic, and was therefore explored in this short format.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Premisecitation

    People from Western civilisation relate more easily to the negative components of self-compassion than to the positive ones.

    “For example, researchers have claimed that people from Western civilisation relate more easily to the negative components of self-compassion than the positive ones (Neff & Dahm, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Neff & Dahm, 2015 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The stronger association of negative SCS items with psychopathology could be explained by factors other than negative components being more predictive of psychopathology.

    “However, this could be explained by factors other than negative components being more predictive of psychopathology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Self-compassion has been conceptualised as more than simply a lack of self-criticism.

    “Self-compassion has been conceptualised as more than simply a lack of self-criticism (Warren, Smeets, & Neff, 2016)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Warren, Smeets, & Neff, 2016
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    Cultural and clinical factors could contribute to the stronger link between negative SCS items and psychopathology.

    “This could contribute to the stronger link between negative items and psychopathology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Mindfulness is the primary construct of initiating compassion for self and others, as it assists in identifying when there is suffering and the need to enable the appropriate compassionate response.

    “Considering mindfulness to be the primary construct of initiating compassion for self and others, as it assists identifying when there is suffering, and the need to enable the appropriate compassionate response”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    People struggling with mental health, such as those showing symptoms of depression, find the concept of self-compassion difficult to practise and components of self-compassion difficult to experience.

    “In addition, people struggling with mental health, such as those who show symptoms of depression, find the concept of self-compassion difficult to practise and components of self-compassion difficult to experience (Pauley & McPherson, 2010).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pauley & McPherson, 2010

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Both studies relied on a university Research Participation Scheme, which rewards participants with credits, to recruit participants.

    “Both studies relied on a Research Participation Scheme within the university to recruit participants, which is based on rewarding participants with credits.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
44 of 44
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Non-significant differences in outcomes (self-compassion, mindfulness and anxiety) between the two interventions would partially suggest that the effectiveness rests on both negative and positive items.

    “We assumed that non-significant differences in outcomes (i.e., self-compassion, mindfulness and anxiety) between the two interventions would partially suggest that the effectiveness rests on both negative and positive items.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The positive and negative items of the Self-Compassion Scale are polar opposites.

    “if we were to assume that the positive and negative items are polar opposites, we would expect that both self-compassion and self-criticism reduction interventions would influence all self-compassion subscales similarly”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The altered subscale, formed by rephrasing the positive SCS items as their exact polar opposites, validly represents the content of the original negative SCS items.

    “whether we are talking about the much debated negative items or the positive items rephrased (to represent negative items -i.e., the exact polar opposites), there seems to be an overly high association”
3 of 3

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Claimed self-judgment difference is not supported by the group comparison

    Major

    The text says the follow-up analyses found a significant difference in self-judgment, but Table 3 reports a non-significant Time × Group effect for self-judgment (p = .138). A significant change in one condition but not the other does not itself establish a difference between conditions.

  • Claimed greater anxiety reduction conflicts with the interaction test

    Minor

    The discussion describes a marginally greater anxiety reduction under self-compassion than under self-criticism. Table 1 reports the Time × Group test for state anxiety as p = .697, which does not support even a marginal difference in reductions.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mantzios, M., Koneva, A., & Egan, H.
Affiliations
Birmingham City University (GB)
Corresponding author
Mantzios, Michail
Venue
Current Issues in Personality Psychology
Published
2020-11-09
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
289-300
ISSN
  • 2353-4192 (ISSN-L)
  • 2353-561X
OpenAlex
W3120535904
Cited by
12
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4
FWCI
0.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Current Issues in Personality Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
self-compassion, Self-Compassion Scale, two-factor model, self-criticism, self-kindness, self-judgment, scale validity, mindfulness, anxiety, self-compassion interventions, psychopathology

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-18.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-18.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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