, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 212–220 | Cite as

Response Shift After a Mindfulness-Based Intervention: Measurement Invariance Testing of the Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences

  • Christian U. KrägelohEmail author
  • Claudia Bergomi
  • Richard J. Siegert
  • Oleg N. Medvedev


Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have been linked to positive outcomes for a range of psychological and physical health conditions, prompting the need for a high degree of validity and reliability in the measurement of mindfulness. While a number of mindfulness self-report instruments are available with demonstrated psychometric robustness, limited empirical data are available on the extent to which ratings at different time points may be affected by changes in standards of reference that may occur as a result from having completed an MBI. The present study investigated the presence of response shift in a sample of 181 MBI course participants who completed the 37-item Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences (CHIME) during the first and final week of the course. Measurement invariance testing using confirmatory factor analysis investigated invariance of the factor structure (configural invariance), factor loadings (metric invariance), and intercepts (scalar invariance) across the two measurement time points. Lack of scalar invariance indicated evidence of response shift for 4 or possibly 7 of the 37 items. The relatively minor amount of response shift is encouraging for the field of mindfulness measurement, particularly since it has generally been hypothesized that mindfulness is particularly prone to this phenomenon. Further studies using other instruments and techniques to investigate response shift are recommended.


Mindfulness Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences (CHIME) Response shift Confirmatory factor analysis Measurement invariance Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

The study was conducted in compliance with the guidelines of the university ethics committee of one of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 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. doi: 10.1177/1073191104268029.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 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. doi: 10.1177/1073191105283504.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Belzer, F., Schmidt, S., Lucius-Hoene, G., Schneider, J. F., Orellana-Rios, C. L., & Sauer, S. (2013). Challenging the construct validity of mindfulness assessment—a cognitive interview study of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Mindfulness, 4(1), 33–44. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0165-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013). Measuring mindfulness: first steps towards the development of a comprehensive mindfulness scale. Mindfulness, 4(1), 18–32. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0102-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2014). Konstruktion und erste Validierung eines Fragebogens zur umfassenden Erfassung von Achtsamkeit [Construction and initial validation of a questionnaire for the comprehensive investigation of mindfulness]. Diagnostica, 60(3), 111–125. doi: 10.1026/0012-1924/a000109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Billington R., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2015). Quality of life and higher education. In M. A. Henning, C. U. Krägeloh, & G. Wong-Toi (Eds.), Student motivation and quality of life in higher education (pp. 28–36). Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. 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. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bryant, F. B., & Satorra, A. (2012). Principles and practice of scaled difference chi-square testing. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(3), 372–398. doi: 10.1080/10705511.2012.687671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buchheld, N., Grossman, P., & Walach, H. (2001). Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (Vipassana) and meditation-based psychotherapy: the development of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Journal of Meditation and Meditation Research, 1(1), 11–34.Google Scholar
  10. Camfield, L., & Skevington, S. M. (2008). On subjective well-being and quality of life. Journal of Health Psychology, 13(6), 764–775. doi: 10.1177/1359105308093860.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Chiesa, A., Anselmi, R., & Serretti, A. (2014). Psychological mechanisms of mindfulness-based interventions: what do we know? Holistic Nursing Practice, 28(2), 124–148. doi: 10.1097/HNP.0000000000000017.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dimidjian, S., & Linehan, M. M. (2003). Defining an agenda for future research on the clinical application of mindfulness practice. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 166–171. doi: 10.1093/clipsy/bpg019.Google Scholar
  13. Frewen, P. A., Unholzer, F., Logie-Hagan, K. R.-J., & MacKinley, J. D. (2014). Meditation breath attention scores (MBAS): test-retest reliability and sensitivity to repeated practice. Mindfulness, 5(2), 161–169. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0161-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grossman, P. (2008). On measuring mindfulness in psychosomatic and psychological research. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 64(4), 405–408. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2008.02.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 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. doi: 10.1037/a0022713.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jöreskog, K. G. (1990). New developments in LISREL: analysis of ordinal variables using polychoric correlations and weighted least squares. Quality & Quantity, 24(4), 387–404. doi: 10.1007/BF00152012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: structural equation modelling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  20. Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degress of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507. doi: 10.1177/0049124114543236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leigh, J., Bowen, S., & Marlatt, G. A. (2005). Spirituality, mindfulness and substance abuse. Addictive Behaviors, 30(7), 1335–1341. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2005.01.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Levinson, D. B., Stoll, E. L., Kindy, S. D., Merry, H. L., & Davidson, R. J. (2014). A mind you can count on: validating breath counting as a behavioral measure of mindfulness. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1202. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01202.
  23. 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. doi: 10.1007/s12671-015-0454-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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. doi: 10.1007/s12671-015-0475-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Kersten, P., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2017a). Improving the precision of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire using a Rasch approach. Mindfulness. doi: 10.1007/s12671-016-0676-8.
  26. Medvedev, O. N., Krägeloh, C. U., Narayanan, A., & Siegert, R. J. (2017b). Measuring mindfulness: applying generalizability theory to distinguish between state and trait. Mindfulness. doi: 10.1007/s12671-017-0679-0.
  27. Oort, F. J. (2005). Using structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 587–598. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-0830-y.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 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. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0395-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: the state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Raju, N. S., Lafitte, L. J., & Byrne, B. M. (2002). Measurement equivalence: a comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 517–529. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.87.3.517.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Reiner, K., Tibi, L., & Lipsitz, J. D. (2013). Do mindfulness-based interventions reduce pain intensity? A critical review of the literature. Pain Medicine, 14(2), 230–242. doi: 10.1111/pme.12006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Sauer, S., Walach, H., Offenbächer, M., Lynch, S., & Kohls, N. (2011). Measuring mindfulness: a Rasch analysis of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Religions, 2(4), 693–706. doi: 10.3390/rel2040693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sauer, S., Walach, H., Schmidt, S., Hinterberger, T., Lynch, S., Büssing, A., & Kohls, N. (2013a). Assessment of mindfulness: review on the state of the art. Mindfulness, 4(1), 3–17. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0122-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sauer, S., Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Ives, J., & Kohls, N. (2013b). Specific objectivity of mindfulness—a Rasch analysis of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Mindfulness, 4(1), 45–54. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0145-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scholderer, J., Grunert, K. G., & Brunsø, K. (2005). A procedure for eliminating additive bias from cross-cultural survey data. Journal of Business Research, 58(1), 72–78. doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00475-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schwartz, C. E. (2010). Applications of response shift theory and methods to participation measurement: a brief history of a young field. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91(9 Suppl), S38–S43. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.029.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Schwartz, C. E., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (1999). Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. Social Science & Medicine, 48(11), 1531–1548. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00047-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shennan, C., Payne, S., & Fenlon, D. (2011). What is the evidence for the use of mindfulness-based interventions in cancer care? A review. Psycho-Oncology, 20(7), 681–697. doi: 10.1002/pon.1819.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Van Dam, N. T., Earlywine, M., & Borders, A. (2010). Measuring mindfulness? An Item Response Theory analysis of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(7), 805–810. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Visted, E., Vøllestad, J., Nielsen, M. B., & Nielsen, G. H. (2015). The impact of group-based mindfulness training on self-reported mindfulness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 6(3), 501–522. doi: 10.1007/s12671-014-0283-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 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
  42. Wu, W., & West, S. G. (2010). Sensitivity of fit indices to mispecification in growth curve models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45(3), 420–452. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2010.483378.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian U. Krägeloh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Claudia Bergomi
    • 2
  • Richard J. Siegert
    • 1
  • Oleg N. Medvedev
    • 1
  1. 1.Auckland University of TechnologyAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.University of BernBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations