Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Validation of the English-Language Version of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in India: a Rasch Analysis

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

Abstract

Objectives

Numerous studies have documented the positive effects of mindfulness practice on the alleviation of various kinds of psychological distress, but a dearth of evidence remains related to the validity of common mindfulness instruments in Indian populations. The present study aimed to explore the higher-order construct of mindfulness in India and evaluate the psychometric properties of the widely used 39-item Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire-English-language version (FFMQ) on a sample recruited from India.

Methods

Adults (n = 300) between the age range of 20 and 35 years who have neither had experience nor exposure to any previous meditative technique participated in this study. Using Rasch analysis, various FFMQ models were tested. To support the findings of Rasch analysis and to provide continuity with some of the past research, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was also performed to validate our findings.

Results

Adequate Rasch analysis fits were not achieved for the conventional five-factor model but further iterative analysis identified three misfitting items of the Describing facet (items 12, 16, and 22). Using a subtest approach, a modified five-factor solution without the three misfitting items provided an acceptable fit, which was subsequently confirmed by the CFA.

Conclusion

This study confirmed the suitability of the higher-order structure of the FFMQ for use in India. The English-language version of the FFMQ has been shown to have good psychometric properties if three items from the Describing facet are removed.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguadon, J., Luciano, J. V., Cebolla, A., Serrano-Blanco, A., Soler, J., & García-Campayo, J. (2015). Bifactor analysis and construct validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) in non-clinical Spanish samples. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

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

  • 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. 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 non-meditating samples. Assessment, 15(3), 329–342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balalla, S. K., Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2019). Validation of the WHOQoL-BREF and shorter versions using Rasch analysis in traumatic brain injury and orthopaedic populations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 100(10), 1853–1862.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013). The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness, 4(3), 191–202.

    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 

  • 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 for Meditation and Meditation Research, 1, 11–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardaciotto, L. A., 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.

    Article  PubMed  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 

  • 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 

  • De Bruin, E. I., Topper, M., Muskens, J. G. A. M., Bögels, S. M., & Kamphuis, J. H. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) in a meditating and a non-meditating sample. Assessment, 19(2), 187–197.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, Y. Q., Liu, X. H., Rodriguez, M. A., & Xia, C. Y. (2011). The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire: Psychometric properties of the Chinese version. Mindfulness, 2(2), 123–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, G. C., Hayes, A. M., Kumar, S. M., & Greeson, J. M. (2004). Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Giovannini, C., Giromini, L., Bonalume, L., Tagini, A., Lang, M., & Amadei, G. (2014). The Italian Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire: A contribution to its validity and reliability. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 36, 415–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, I. K. (2018). Factor structure and external validity of the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in pregnancy. Mindfulness, 9(1), 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, J., Strauss, C., Crane, C., Barnhofer, T., Karl, A., Cavanagh, K., & Kuyken, W. (2016). Examining the factor structure of the 39-item and 15-item versions of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire before and after mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for people with recurrent depression. Psychological Assessment, 28(7), 791–802.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Haas, B. W., & Akamatsu, Y. (2019). Psychometric investigation of the five facets of mindfulness and well-being measures in the Kingdom of Bhutan and the USA. Mindfulness, 10(7), 1339–1351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, S. C., Follette, V. M., & Linehan, M. M. (Eds.). (2004). Mindfulness and acceptance: Expanding cognitive behavioral tradition. The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeren, A., Douilliez, C., Peschard, V., Debrauwere, L., & Philippot, P. (2011). Cross cultural validity of the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire: Adaptation and validation in a French-speaking sample. European Review of Applied Psychology, 61(3), 147–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hermida, R. (2015). The problem of allowing correlated errors in structural equation modeling: Concerns and considerations. Computational Methods in Social Sciences, 3(1), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modelling with the SIMPLIS command language. Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates.

  • Joshi, S. K. (2020). The linguistic landscape of India. Heritage: India Perspectives, Issue 4.

  • Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2), 144–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabat-Zinn, J. (2005). Bringing mindfulness to medicine: An interview with Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD Interview by Karolyn Gazella. Advances in Mind Body Medicine, 21(2), 22–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kachru, B. B. (1986). The Indianization of English. English Today, 2(2), 31–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, E., Krägeloh, C. U., Medvedev, O. N., Duncan, L. G., & Singh, N. N. (2019). Interpersonal mindfulness in parenting scale: Testing the psychometric properties of a Korean version. Mindfulness, 10(3), 516–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krägeloh, C. U., Henning, M. A., Medvedev, O. N., Feng, X. J., Moir, F., Billington, R., & Siegert, R. J. (2019). Mindfulness-based intervention research: Characteristics, approaches, and developments. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, M. A., Bishop, S. R., Segal, Z. V., Buis, T., Anderson, N. D., Carlson, L., Shapiro, S., Carmody, J., Abbey, S., & Devins, G. (2006). The Toronto Mindfulness Scale: Development and validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(12), 1445–1467.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, Y. Y., Png, M. E., Conaghan, P., & Tennant, A. (2014). A systematic literature review on the application of Rasch analysis in musculoskeletal disease—A special interest group report of OMERACT 11. Journal of Rheumatology, 41(1), 159–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, R. D. (2005). Finland, cultural lone wolf. Intercultural Press.

    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), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandal, S. P., Arya, Y. K., & Pandey, R. (2016). Validation of the factor structure of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing, 7(1), 61–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 391–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M.-H.R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medvedev, O. N., Krägeloh, C. U., Narayanan, A., & Siegert, R. J. (2017a). Measuring mindfulness: Applying generalizability theory to distinguish between state and trait. Mindfulness, 8(4), 1036–1046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Kersten, P., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2017b). Improving the precision of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire using a Rasch approach. Mindfulness, 8(4), 995–1008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medvedev, O. N., Bergomi, C., Röthlin, P., & Krägeloh, C. U. (2019). Assessing the psychometric properties of the Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences (CHIME) using Rasch analysis. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(5), 650–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehrotra, R. (2003). A British response to some English uses. English Today, 19(3), 19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montaut, A. & Inalco. (2010). English in India and the role of the elite in the national project. In S. I. Hasnain & S. Chaudhary (Eds.), Problematizing language studies, cultural, theoretical and applied perspectives: Essays in honor of Rama Kant Agnihotri (pp. 83-116). Delhi: Akbar Books.

  • Nishimura, S., Nevgi, A., & Tella, S. (2008). Communication style and cultural features in high/low context communication cultures: A case study of Finland, Japan and India. In A. Kallioniemi (Ed.), Renovating and developing subject didactics. Proceedings of a subject-didactic symposium in Helsinki, University of Helsinki, Department of Applied Sciences of Education, 2, 783–796.

  • Radon, S. (2014). Validation of the Polish adaptation of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. Annals of Psychology, 17(4), 737–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramos, A., Rosado, A., Serpa, S., Cangas, A., Gallego, J., & Ramos, L. (2018). Validity evidence of the Portuguese version of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Psychology, 27(2), 87–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudkin, E., Medvedev, O. N., & Siegert, R. J. (2018). The Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire: Why the observing subscale does not predict psychological symptoms. Mindfulness, 9(1), 230–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M., & Teasdale, J. (2002). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: A new approach to preventing relapse. Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M., & Teasdale, J. (2013). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, S. L., Oman, D., Thoresen, C. E., Plante, T. G., & Flinders, T. (2008). Cultivating mindfulness: Effects on well-being. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64(7), 840–862.

    Article  PubMed  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 

  • Siegling, A. B., & Petrides, K. V. (2016). Zeroing in on mindfulness facets: Similarities, validity, and dimensionality across three independent measures. PLoS ONE, 11(4), 1–17.

    Article  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(2), 205–231.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sugiura, Y., Sato, A., Ito, Y., & Murakami, H. (2012). Development and validation of the Japanese version of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire. Mindfulness, 3(2), 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanay, G., & Bernstein, A. (2013). State Mindfulness Scale (SMS): Development and initial validation. Psychological Assessment, 25(4), 1286–1299.

    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 

  • Tran, U. S., Glück, T. M., & Nader, I. W. (2013). Investigating the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ): Construction of a short form and evidence of a two-factor higher order structure of mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(9), 951–965.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Truijens, S. E. M., Nyklíček, I., Son, J. V., & Pop, V. J. M. (2016). Validation of a short form Three facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (TFMQ-SF) in pregnant women. Personality and Individual Differences, 93, 118–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. J., Dalgleish, T., Karl, A., & Kuyken, W. (2014). Examining the factor structures of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire and the Self-Compassion Scale. Psychological Assessment, 26(2), 407–418.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to all the participants and support staff of the organizations where the data were collected and to the Dean (School of Behavioral Science) and the Executive Registrar of the National Forensic Sciences University for the appropriate Institutional Review Board approval.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health & Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Kalpana Raman, Richard J. Siegert & Christian U. Krägeloh

  2. School of Behavioural Science, National Forensic Sciences University, Gandhinagar, 382007, Gujarat, India

    Proshanto Kr. Saha

Authors
  1. Kalpana Raman
    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. Proshanto Kr. Saha
    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

Contributions

KR designed the study, collected the data, conceived the appropriate statistical approach, performed the analysis, composed, and edited the manuscript. RJS contributed to statistical analysis and writing of the manuscript. PKS collaborated with designing the study, and participated in statistical analysis and writing of the manuscript; CUK contributed to conceiving and conducting the statistical analysis, writing, and editing of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kalpana Raman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raman, K., Siegert, R.J., Saha, P.K. et al. Validation of the English-Language Version of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in India: a Rasch Analysis. Mindfulness 12, 2955–2965 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-021-01757-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-021-01757-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation