Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment · 2020
Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of the Five Facet of Mindfulness Questionnaire.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shallcross Amanda, Lu Nathaniel Y, Hays Ron D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The Five Facet of Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) is widely used to assess mindfulness. The present study provides a psychometric evaluation of the FFMQ that includes item response theory (IRT) analyses and evaluation of item characteristic curves.
METHOD: We administered the FFMQ, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Ruminative Response Scale, and the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire to a heterogenous sample of 240 community-based adults. We estimated internal consistency reliability, item-scale correlations, categorical confirmatory factor analysis, and IRT graded response models for the FFMQ. We also estimated correlations among the FFMQ scales and correlations with the other measures included in the study.
RESULTS: Internal consistency reliabilities for the five FFMQ scales were 0.82 or higher. A five-factor categorical model fit the data well. IRT-estimated item characteristic curves indicated that the five response options were monotonically ordered for most of the items. Product-moment correlations between simple-summated scoring and IRT scoring of the scales were 0.97 or higher.
CONCLUSIONS: The FFMQ accurately identifies varying levels of trait mindfulness. IRT-derived estimates will inform future adaptations to the FFMQ (e.g., briefer versions) and the development of future mindfulness instruments.
METHOD: We administered the FFMQ, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Ruminative Response Scale, and the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire to a heterogenous sample of 240 community-based adults. We estimated internal consistency reliability, item-scale correlations, categorical confirmatory factor analysis, and IRT graded response models for the FFMQ. We also estimated correlations among the FFMQ scales and correlations with the other measures included in the study.
RESULTS: Internal consistency reliabilities for the five FFMQ scales were 0.82 or higher. A five-factor categorical model fit the data well. IRT-estimated item characteristic curves indicated that the five response options were monotonically ordered for most of the items. Product-moment correlations between simple-summated scoring and IRT scoring of the scales were 0.97 or higher.
CONCLUSIONS: The FFMQ accurately identifies varying levels of trait mindfulness. IRT-derived estimates will inform future adaptations to the FFMQ (e.g., briefer versions) and the development of future mindfulness instruments.