Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Improving the Precision of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire Using a Rasch Approach

  • ORIGINAL PAPER
  • Published:
Mindfulness Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mindfulness has emerged as an important contributor to health and well-being, although its accurate assessment represents an ongoing challenge. The 39-item Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) is a widely used measure of trait mindfulness that includes five subscales: observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging, and non-reacting to inner experience. While the instrument has been shown to possess generally acceptable psychometric properties, no work so far has been conducted to increase the precision of the instrument and its subscales in discriminating between individual trait levels. The present study used Rasch analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the FFMQ using a sample of 296 participants, with the intention to improve the scale if necessary. The best fit to the Rasch model for all five FFMQ subscales and the total scale was achieved after minor modifications that involved combining locally dependent items into subtests and removing two items (24 and 32) that critically affected the goodness-of-fit indices. These findings support the psychometric properties and internal construct validity of the modified FFMQ, and ordinal-to-interval Rasch conversion tables are included here that can be used to increase the precision of measurement without requiring any modifications of the original FFMQ response format. These findings have implications for a wide range of areas where more accurate assessment of mindfulness and its facets is necessary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrich, D. (1978). Rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrica, 43, 561–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrich, D., Hagquist, C. (2015). Real and artificial differential item functioning in polytomous items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 75(2), 185–207.

  • Andrich, D., Sheridan, B., & Luo, G. (2009). RUMM 2030. Perth: RUMM Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Baer, R., Samuel, D. B., & Lykins, E. L. B. (2010). Differential item functioning on the five facet mindfulness questionnaire is minimal in demographically matched meditators and nonmeditators. Assessment, 20(10), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, R., Smith, G., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, R., Smith, G., Lykins, E. L. B., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., Walsh, E., Duggan, D., & Williams, J. M. G. (2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment, 15(3), 329–342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brogden, H. E. (1977). The Rasch model, the law of comparative judgment and additive conjoint measurement. Psychometrika, 42(4), 631–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, K. W., & Kasser, T. (2005). Are psychological and ecological well-being compatible? The role of values, mindfulness, and lifestyle. Social Indicators Research, 74(2), 349–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cash, M., & Whittingham, K. (2010). What facets of mindfulness contribute to psychological well-being and depressive, anxious, and stress-related symptomatology? Mindfulness, 1(3), 177–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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). The British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47(4), 451–455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R., Gullone, E., & Allen, N. B. (2009). Mindfulness emotion regulation: an integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(6), 560–572.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chiesa, A., & Serretti, A. (2010). A systematic review of neurobiological and clinical features of mindfulness meditations. Psychological Medicine, 40(8), 1239–1252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, M. S., Neuser, N. J., Michael, P. G., & Baitmangalkar, A. (2012). Exploring the psychometric properties of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire. Mindfulness, 3(2), 124–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisak, B., & von Lehe, A. C. (2012). The relation between the five facets of mindfulness and worry in a non-clinical sample. Mindfulness, 3(1), 15–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goh, H. E., Marais, I., & Ireland, M. J. (2015). A Rasch model analysis of the mindful attention awareness scale. Assesment. doi:DOI. doi:10.1177/1073191115607043.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, 255–262.Hayes, S. C., Follette, V. M., & Linehan, M. M. (Eds.). (2004). Mindfulness and acceptance: expanding cognitive-behavioral tradition. New York: The Guilford Press.

  • Hobart, J., & Cano, S. (2009). Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: the role of new psychometric methods. Health Technology Assessment, 13(12), 1–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Inchausti, F., Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. R. (2014). Rasch analysis of the Spanish version of the mindful attention awareness scale (MAAS) in a clinical sample. Revista de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental, 7(1), 32–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Josefsson, T., Lindwall, M., & Broberg, A. G. (2014). The effects of a short-term mindfulness based intervention on self-reported mindfulness, decentering, executive attention, psychological health, and coping style: examining unique mindfulness effects and mediators. Mindfulness, 5(1), 18–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994). Wherever you go, there you are: mindfulness meditation in everyday life. New York: Hyperion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, 328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren Nilsson, Å., & Tennant, A. (2011). Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: the functional independence measure (FIM™) revisited. Journal of Reabilitation Medicine, 43, 884–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren-Nilsson, Å., Jonsdottir, I. H., Ahlborg, G., & Tennant, A. (2013). Construct validity of the psychological general well being index (PGWBI) in a sample of patients undergoing treatment for stress-related exhaustion: a Rasch analysis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 11, 2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lyvers, M., Makin, C., Toms, E., Thorberg, F. A., & Samios, C. (2014). Trait mindfulness in relation to emotional self-regulation and executive function. Mindfulness, 5(6), 619–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters G., A. (1982) Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrica, 47, 149–174.

  • Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Feng, X. J., Billington, D. R., Jang, J. Y., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2016a). Measuring trait mindfulness: how to improve the precision of the mindful attention awareness scale using a Rasch model. Mindfulness, 7(2), 384–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Kersten, P., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2016b). Rasch analysis of the Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Mindfulness, 7(2), 466–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norquist, J. M., Fitzpatrick, R., Dawson, J., & Jenkinson, C. (2004). Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Medical Care, 42(1), I25–I36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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(10), 2639–2659.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, M. R., Brown, D. B., Bravo, A. J., & Witkiewitz, K. (2015). Staying in the moment and finding purpose: the associations of trait mindfulness, decentering, and purpose in life with depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and alcohol-related problems. Mindfulness, 6(3), 645–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penfield, R. D. (2007). An approach for categorizing DIF in polytomous items. Applied Measurement in Education, 20, 335–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment test. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, G. (1961). On general laws and the meaning of measurement in psychology.University of California Press. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability., Berkeley, California.

  • Sauer, S., Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Ives, J., & Kohls, N. (2013). Specific objectivity of mindfulness—a Rasch analysis of the Freiburg mindfulness inventory. Mindfulness, 4(1), 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Siegert, R. J., Tennant, A., & Turner-Stokes, L. (2010). Rasch analysis of the Beck depression inventory-II in a neurological rehabilitation sample. Disability and Rehabilitation, 32(1), 8–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. V. (2002). Detecting and evaluation the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, 205–231.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2013). Census ethnic group profiles. Wellington: New Zealand Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stucki, G., Daltroy, L., Katz, J. N., Johannesson, M., & Liang, M. H. (1996). Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures: the whole may not equal the sum of the parts. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49(7), 711–717.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tennant, A., & Conaghan, P. G. (2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis & Rheumatism, 57(8), 1358–1362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennant, A., & Pallant, J. F. (2006). Unidimensionality matters! (a tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20, 1048–1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dam, N. T., Earleywine, M., & Danoff-Burg, S. (2009). Differential item function across meditators and non-meditators on the five facet mindfulness questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 516–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: a case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24(3), 185–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoogman, S., Goldberg, S. B., Hoyt, W. T., & Miller, L. (2015). Mindfulness interventions with youth: a meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 6(2), 290–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

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.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

    Oleg N. Medvedev, Richard J. Siegert & Christian U. Krägeloh

  2. University of Brighton, Brighton, UK

    Paula Kersten

Authors
  1. Oleg N. Medvedev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard J. Siegert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paula Kersten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christian U. Krägeloh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oleg N. Medvedev.

Ethics declarations

We declare no conflicts of interest in connection with this paper. The study was conducted in compliance with the guidelines of the authors’ university ethics committee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Medvedev, O.N., Siegert, R.J., Kersten, P. et al. Improving the Precision of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire Using a Rasch Approach. Mindfulness 8, 995–1008 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0676-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0676-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation