, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 1036–1046 | Cite as

Measuring Mindfulness: Applying Generalizability Theory to Distinguish between State and Trait

  • Oleg N. MedvedevEmail author
  • Christian U. Krägeloh
  • Ajit Narayanan
  • Richard J. Siegert


Mindfulness can be conceptualized as either a state or a trait, but currently, there is no reliable psychometric method to distinguish clearly between the two in psychological measures. Notwithstanding the clinical effectiveness of mindfulness, any specific element of mindfulness treatment can only be evaluated by comparing state and trait changes using techniques that allow such changes to be measured. Generalizability Theory (GT) is a suitable method to differentiate between state and trait variance components, and its application is illustrated here with an empirical example using the Toronto Mindfulness Scale (TMS). Person × occasion interaction is a marker of individual state changes and should explain the largest amount of variance in a valid state measure. To assess state variability, data were collected on three separate occasions: (i) after a holiday, (ii) immediately after a mindfulness exercise, and (iii) before a stressful event (i.e., exam). Generalizability analysis was applied to examine sources of true and error variances. The TMS captured a larger amount of variance attributed to a state and only a small amount associated with trait mindfulness, which is consistent with the purpose of the measure. This study has demonstrated that Generalizability Theory can be usefully applied to distinguish between state and trait components in a measure, and it is recommended as an appropriate psychometric method to validate state and trait measurement tools. These findings have far-reaching implications to improve the accuracy of the distinction between state and trait in mindfulness measurement and other areas of psychological assessment.


State mindfulness Toronto mindfulness scale Measurement Generalizability theory Psychometrics Validation 



This study is a part of doctoral work of the first author funded by the Vice-Chancellor’s Scholarship of the Auckland University of Technology.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The study was conducted in compliance with the guidelines of the Auckland University of Technology Ethics Committee.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Allal, L., & Cardinet, J. (1976). Application of generalizability theory: estimation of errors and adaptation of measurement designs. Neuchâtel: Institut Romand de Recherche et de documentation pédagogiques.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction on to measurement theory. Monterey: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  3. Arterberry, B. J., Martens, M. P., Cadigan, J. M., & Rohrer, D. (2014). Application of generalizability theory to big five inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 98–103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Baer, R. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: a conceptual and empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 125–142.Google Scholar
  5. Bloch, R., & Norman, G. (2012). Generalizability theory for the perplexed: a practical introduction and guide: AMEE guide no. 68. Medical Teacher, 34, 960–992.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 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), 822–884.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Brennan, R. L. (1977). Generalizability analysis: principles and procedures. Iowa City: The American College Testing Program.Google Scholar
  8. Brennan, R. L. (1992). Elements of generalizability theory (2nd ed.). Iowa City: ACT Publications.Google Scholar
  9. Brennan, R. L. (2001). Generalizability theory. New York: Springer-Verlag Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buss, A. H. (1989). Personality as traits. American Psychologist, 44, 1378–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cahn, B. R., & Polich, J. (2006). Meditation states and traits : EEG, ERP, and neuroimaging studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 180–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chaplin, W. F., John, O. P., & Goldberg, L. R. (1988). Conceptions of states and traits: dimensional attributes with ideals as prototypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 541–557.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiesa, A., & Serretti, A. (2010). A systematic review of neurobiological and clinical features of mindfulness meditations. Psychological Medicine, 40, 1239–1252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cronbach, L. J., Rajaratnam, N., & Gleser, G. C. (1963). Theory of generalizability: a liberation of reliability theory. The British Journal of Statistical Psychology, XVII(2), 137–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, K. M., Lau, M. A., & Cairns, D. R. (2009). Development and preliminary validation of a trait version of the Toronto Mindfulness Scale. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23(3), 185–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Epstein, S. (1984). Trait theory as personality theory: can a part be as great as the whole? Psychological Inquiry, 5, 120–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fisher, R. A. (1925). Intraclass correlation and the analysis of variance. In: statistical methods for research workers. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications for Genesis Pub.Google Scholar
  18. Gardinet, J., Johnson, S., & Pini, G. (2009). Applying generalizability theory using EduG. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Geiser, C., Litson, K., Bishop, J., Keller, B. T., Burns, G. L., & Servera, M. (2015). Analyzing person, situation and person - situation interaction effects: Latent State-Trait Models for the Combination of Random and Fixed Situations.Google Scholar
  20. Hamaker, E. L., Nesselroade, J. R., & Molenaar, P. C. (2007). The integrated trait-state model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Ivanovski, B., & Malhi, G. S. (2007). The psychological and neurophysiological concomitants of mindfulness forms of meditation. Acta Neuropsychiatrica, 19, 76–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kenny, D. A., & Zautra, A. (Eds.). (2001). Trait–state models for longitudinal data. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  24. Lau, M. A., Bishop, S. R., Segal, Z. V., Buis, T., Anderson, N. D., Carlson, L., et al. (2006). The Toronto mindfulness scale: development and validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(12), 1445–1467.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Park, T., Reilly-Spong, M., & Gross, C. R. (2013). Mindfulness: a systematic review of instruments to measure an emergent patient-reported outcome (PRO). Quality of Life Research, 22, 2639–2659.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Ramanaiah, N. V., Franzen, M., & Schill, T. (1983). A psychometric study of the State-Trait Anxiety inventory. Personality Assessment, 47, 531–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenzweig, S., Greeson, J. M., Reibel, D. K., Green, J. S., Jasser, S. A., & Beasley, D. (2010). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for chronic pain conditions: variation in treatment outcomes and role of home meditation practice. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 68(1), 29–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2013). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  29. Shavelson, R. G., Webb, N. M., & Rowley, G. L. (1989). Generalizability theory. American Psychologist, 44, 599–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shoukri, M. M., Asyali, M. H., & Donner, A. (2004). Sample size requirements for the design of reliability study: review and new results. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 13, 251–271.Google Scholar
  31. Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., & Lushene, R. E. (1970). Test manual for the state trait anxiety inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  32. Spielberger, C. D. (1999). Manual for the state-trait anger expression inventory-2. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  33. Swiss Society for Research in Education Working Group. (2006). EDUG user guide. Neuchâtel: IRDP.Google Scholar
  34. Williams, M., & Penman, D. (2011). Mindfulness: an eight-week plan to find peace in a frantic world. New York: Rodale Inc..Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oleg N. Medvedev
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christian U. Krägeloh
    • 1
  • Ajit Narayanan
    • 1
  • Richard J. Siegert
    • 1
  1. 1.Auckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations