, Volume 5, Issue 5, pp 552–565 | Cite as

The Spanish Version of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS): Measurement Invariance and Psychometric Properties

  • Christopher J. Johnson
  • John S. Wiebe
  • Osvaldo F. Morera


We examined the measurement invariance and psychometric properties of a Spanish-language version of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) in a U.S. sample. A total of 609 undergraduate students, including 325 bilingual (Spanish-speaking) participants, from a Hispanic-majority institution completed the assessment battery and were included in the analyses. The MAAS and the Spanish-language Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS-SP) were shown to be equivalent via multigroup confirmatory factor analysis models testing configural, metric, and scalar invariance. A test of latent mean differences indicated a small, but statistically significant cross-language difference in trait mindfulness as construed by the MAAS, as the latent mean of the MAAS-SP was slightly higher compared with the latent mean of the MAAS. The MAAS-SP evidenced good psychometric properties and concurrent validity. Taken together, findings support the reliability and validity of the MAAS and MAAS-SP in measuring mindfulness across languages. Future studies could continue efforts aimed at examining the structure of mindfulness and its facets across languages.


Mindfulness Mindful Attention Awareness Scale Spanish Measurement invariance Assessment 


  1. Astin, J. A. (1997). Stress reduction through mindfulness meditation. Effects on psychological symptomatology, sense of control, and spiritual experiences. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 66(2), 97–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: a conceptual and empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 125–143.Google Scholar
  3. Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment, 11(3), 191–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2012a). The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness, Advance online publication, doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0110-9.
  8. Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2012b). Measuring mindfulness: first steps towards the development of a comprehensive mindfulness scale. Mindfulness, Advance online publication, doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0102-9.
  9. Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L. E., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., et al. (2004). Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241.Google Scholar
  10. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brislin, R. W., Lonner, W. J., & Thorndike, E. M. (1973). Cross-cultural research methods. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, K. W., & Cordon, S. (2009). Toward a phenomenology of mindfulness: subjective experience and emotional correlates. In F. Didonna (Ed.), Clinical Handbook of Mindfulness (pp. 59–81). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 211–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown, K. W., West, A. M., Loverich, T. M., & Biegel, G. M. (2011). Assessing adolescent mindfulness: validation of an adapted Mindful Attention Awareness Scale in adolescent normative and psychiatric populations. Psychological Assessment, 23(4), 1023–1033.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Byrne, B. M., & Stewart, S. M. (2006). The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure: a walk through the process. Structural Equation Modeling, 13(2), 287–321. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1302_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008). The assessment of present-moment awareness and acceptance: the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale. Assessment, 15(2), 204–223. doi: 10.1177/1073191107311467.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carlson, L. E., & Brown, K. W. (2005). Validation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale in a cancer population. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 58(1), 29–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Catak, P. D. (2012). The Turkish version of Mindful Attention Awareness Scale: preliminary findings. Mindfulness, 3(1), 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s12671-011-0072-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chadwick, P., Hember, M., Symes, J., Peters, E., Kuipers, E., & Dagnan, D. (2008). Responding mindfully to unpleasant thoughts and images: reliability and validity of the Southampton Mindfulness Questionnaire (SMQ). British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47(4), 451–455. doi: 10.1348/014466508x314891.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheung, G. W. (2008). Testing equivalence in the structure, means, and variances of higher-order constructs with structural equation modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 593–613. doi: 10.1177/1094428106298973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Christopher, M. S., Charoensuk, S., Gilbert, B. D., Neary, T. J., & Pearce, K. L. (2009). Mindfulness in Thailand and the United States: a case of apples versus oranges? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65(6), 590–612. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20580.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Coffey, K., Hartman, M., & Fredrickson, B. (2010). Deconstructing mindfulness and constructing mental health: understanding mindfulness and its mechanisms of action. Mindfulness, 1(4), 235–253. doi: 10.1007/s12671-010-0033-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  28. Cuéllar, I., Arnold, B., & Maldonado, R. (1995). Acculturation rating scale for Mexican Americans-II: a revision of the original ARSMA Scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 17(3), 275–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Delgado, P., Guerrero, G., Goggin, J. P., & Ellis, B. B. (1999). Self-assessment of linguistic skills by bilingual Hispanics. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 21(1), 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Deng, Y.-Q., Li, S., Tang, Y.-Y., Zhu, L.-H., Ryan, R., & Brown, K. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Chinese translation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS). Mindfulness, 3(1), 10–14. doi: 10.1007/s12671-011-0074-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dimidjian, S., & Linehan, M. M. (2003a). Defining an agenda for future research on the clinical application of mindfulness practice. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 166–171.Google Scholar
  33. Dimidjian, S., & Linehan, M. M. (2003b). Mindfulness practice. In W. O'Donohue, J. E. Fisher, & S. C. Hayes (Eds.), Cognitive behavior therapy: applying empirically supported techniques in your practice (pp. 229–237). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  34. Eberth, J., & Sedlmeier, P. (2012). The effects of mindfulness meditation: a meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 3, 174–189. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0101-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Feldman, G., Hayes, A. M., Kumar, S., Greeson, J., & Laurenceau, J.-P. (2007). Mindfulness and emotion regulation: the development and initial validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 29(3), 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fulton, P. R., & Siegel, R. D. (2005). Buddhist and Western psychology: seeking common ground. In C. K. Germer, R. D. Siegel, & P. R. Fulton (Eds.), Mindfulness and psychotherapy (pp. 28–51). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  37. Germer, C. K., Siegel, R. D., & Fulton, P. R. (Eds.). (2005). Mindfulness and psychotherapy. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  38. Goldstein, J. (2002). One dharma: the emerging Western Buddhism. San Francisco: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  39. Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59(2), 93–104. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care, 44(11 Suppl 3), S78–S94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Grossman, P. (2008). On measuring mindfulness in psychosomatic and psychological research. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 64(4), 405–408.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Grossman, P. (2011). Defining mindfulness by how poorly I think I pay attention during everyday awareness and other intractable problems for psychology's (re)invention of mindfulness: comment on Brown et al. (2011). Psychological Assessment, 23(4), 1034–1040.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: a meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57(1), 35–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hancock, G. R. (1997). Structural equation modeling methods of hypothesis testing of latent variable means. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 30(2), 91–105.Google Scholar
  45. Hansen, E., Lundh, L.-G., Homman, A., & Wångby-Lundh, M. (2009). Measuring mindfulness: pilot studies with the Swedish versions of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale and the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 38(1), 2–15. doi: 10.1080/16506070802383230.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hayes, A. M., & Feldman, G. (2004). Clarifying the construct of mindfulness in the context of emotion regulation and the process of change in therapy. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 255–262.Google Scholar
  47. Hayes, S. C., & Shenk, C. (2004). Operationalizing mindfulness without unnecessary attachments. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 249–254.Google Scholar
  48. Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A., & Oh, D. (2010). The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and depression: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(2), 169–183. doi: 10.1037/a0018555.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Hong, S., Malik, M. L., & Lee, M.-K. (2003). Testing configural, metric, scalar, and latent mean invariance across genders in sociotropy and autonomy using a non-Western sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(4), 636–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Horn, J. L., & McArdle, J. J. (1992). A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18(3), 117–144.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Jermann, F., Billieux, J., Larøi, F., Argembeau, A., Bondolfi, G., Zermatten, A., et al. (2009). Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS): psychometric properties of the French translation and exploration of its relations with emotion regulation strategies. Psychological Assessment, 21(4), 506–514. doi: 10.1037/a0017032.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Jöreskog, K. G. (1971). Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika, 36(4), 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80. Chicago: Scientific Software International, Inc.Google Scholar
  55. Kabat-Zinn, J. (1982). An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: theoretical considerations and preliminary results. General Hospital Psychiatry, 4(1), 33–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York: Bantam Dell.Google Scholar
  57. Kabat-Zinn, J. (2005). Coming to our senses: healing ourselves and the world through mindfulness. New York: Hyperion.Google Scholar
  58. Ledesma, D., & Kumano, H. (2009). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and cancer: a meta-analysis. Psycho-Oncology, 18(6), 571–579. doi: 10.1002/pon.1400.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Linehan, M. M. (1993). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  60. Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(1), 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130–149. doi: 10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84–99. doi: 10.1037/1082-989x.4.1.84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. MacKillop, J., & Anderson, E. J. (2007). Further psychometric validation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 29(4), 289–293. doi: 10.1007/s10862-007-9045-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Marsh, H. W., Kit-Tai, H., & Zhonglin, W. (2004). In search of golden rules: comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. McDonald, R. P., & Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a multivariate model: non-centrality and goodness of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58(4), 525–543. doi: 10.1007/bf02294825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Michalak, J., Heidenreich, T., Ströhle, G., & Nachtigall, C. (2008). Die deutsche version der Mindful Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS): psychometrische befunde zu einem achtsamkeitsfragebogen. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie: Forschung und Praxis, 37(3), 200–208. doi: 10.1026/1616-3443.37.3.200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Reise, S. P., Widaman, K. F., & Pugh, R. H. (1993). Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 114(3), 552–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Robinson, F. P., Mathews, H. L., & Witek-Janusek, L. (2003). Psycho-endocrine-immune response to mindfulness-based stress reduction in individuals infected with the human immunodeficiency virus: a quasiexperimental study. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 9(5), 683–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Roth, B. (1997). Mindfulness-based stress reduction in the inner city. Advances, 13(4), 50–58.Google Scholar
  71. Roth, B., & Creaser, T. (1997). Mindfulness meditation-based stress reduction: experience with a bilingual inner-city program. The Nurse Practitioner, 22(3), 150–176.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Roth, B., & Robbins, D. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health-related quality of life: findings from a bilingual inner-city patient population. Psychosomatic Medicine, 66(1), 113–123.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Roth, B., & Stanley, T.-W. (2002). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and healthcare utilization in the inner city: preliminary findings. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 8(1), 60–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  75. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66(4), 507–514. doi: 10.1007/bf02296192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2002). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: a new approach to preventing relapse. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  77. Shapiro, S. L., Brown, K. W., Thoresen, C., & Plante, T. G. (2011). The moderation of mindfulness-based stress reduction effects by trait mindfulness: results from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(3), 267–277. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20761.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Shin, H. B., & Kominski, R. A. (2010). Language use in the United States: 2007. American Community Survey Reports (Vol. ACS-12): U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  79. Soler, J., Tejedor, R., Feliu-Soler, A., Pascual, J. C., Cebolla, A., Soriano, J., et al. (2012). Psychometric proprieties of Spanish version of Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS). Actas Españolas De Psiquiatría, 40(1), 19–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. The Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90. doi: 10.1086/209528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Steiger, J. H. (1999). STATISTICA power analysis. Tulsa: StatSoft.Google Scholar
  82. Steiger, J. H., & Lind, J. M. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA.Google Scholar
  83. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  84. U.S. Census Bureau (2011). Population Estimates Data V2011. Retrieved from Accessed 23 Sept 2012.
  85. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–69. doi: 10.1177/109442810031002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmüller, V., Kleinknecht, N., & Schmidt, S. (2006). Measuring mindfulness–The Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Personality and Individual Differences, 40(8), 1543–1555. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  88. Widaman, K. F., & Reise, S. P. (1997). Exploring the measurement invariance of psychological instruments: applications in the substance use domain. In K. J. Bryant, M. Windle, & S. G. West (Eds.), The science of prevention: methodological advances from alcohol and substance abuse research (pp. 281–324). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher J. Johnson
    • 1
  • John S. Wiebe
    • 2
  • Osvaldo F. Morera
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUtah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations