Dataset Information

Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

ABSTRACT: Objective:Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this gap using factor analytic methods. Methods:Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receiving aftercare for substance use disorder. Results:Parallel analysis suggested multiple factors for all five facets, in both samples. Exploratory factor models suggested the presence of method factors on the acting with awareness (items using the term "distraction") and describing facets (items that were reverse-scored). Confirmatory factor models fit poorly for all facets, in both samples. In follow-up analyses, model fit improved substantially on the acting with awareness and describing facets when method factors were included in a bifactor model. Model fit was also better for the facets of FFMQ short forms than for the full-length facets. The short-form facets and original facets correlated similarly with external criteria in both samples. Conclusions:None of the FFMQ facets fit a unidimensional factor model; yet, follow-up analyses suggested each can be considered substantively unidimensional. Initial tests suggest the facets' multidimensionality did not materially impact their relation to other psychological constructs, suggesting multidimensionality can be ignored for some purposes. The use of short-form facets or latent variable models (e.g., bifactor specifications) are both viable solutions for addressing multidimensionality when desired.

SUBMITTER: Pelham WE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7041801 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Pelham William E WE Gonzalez Oscar O Metcalf Stephen A SA Whicker Cady L CL Witkiewitz Katie K Marsch Lisa A LA Mackinnon David P DP

Mindfulness 20191007 12

<h4>Objective</h4>Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this gap using factor analytic methods.<h4>Methods</h4>Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receivin ...[more]

PMID: 32099585

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA brief measure of dispositional mindfulness is important for applied research on mindfulness. Although short forms of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), which measures the five aspects of mindfulness (i.e., observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging, and non-reactivity), have been developed worldwide, the validity and reliability of the Japanese version has not been examined. This study aims to examine the validity and reliability of the 24-item and 15-item versions of the FFMQ in Japan, which are the most widely used versions worldwide.MethodsOnline surveys were conducted for 889 adults in Japan through an online survey company using self-reported questionnaires including the FFMQ to confirm the factor structure and validity. To examine construct validity, we examined the relationship between the short form of FFMQ and mind wandering, interoceptive awareness, experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, openness, neuroticism, self-compassion, depression, and anxiety, which have been theoretically or empirically shown to be related to mindfulness. In addition, 137 adults responded to the FFMQ again, after four weeks, for the test-retest reliability.ResultsThe correlated five-factor and four-factor (excluding observing) models and the higher-order factor hierarchical model did not show sufficient goodness of fit, while the 24-item version showed acceptable fit when uncorrelated method factors loaded on by the positive and negative (reverse-scored) items were added. However, the 15-item version did not show acceptable fits for any of the models. Regarding reliability, the 24-item version showed acceptable values. In terms of the relationship between the original and the shortened version of the FFMQ, the 24-item version shared approximately 80% of the variance with the original one. In addition, although the wording effects of positive and negative items seemed to affect the correlations between the FFMQ and the other scales, the associations with related concepts were as predicted generally, supporting the construct validity of the short form of the FFMQ.ConclusionIn Japan, the 24-item version of FFMQ showed acceptable validity and reliability similar to the original version, and we recommend that the 24-item version be used.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Publications

Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets