ArticleMindfulness2019
Item Response Theory Analysis of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire and its Short Forms.
Article in Mindfulness, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- eBEfree: Combining Psychoeducation, Mindfulness, and Self-Compassion in an App-Based Psychological Intervention to Manage Binge-Eating Symptoms: A Randomized Controlled Trial.The International journal of eating disorders · 2025Trial
- Trait mindfulness and personality characteristics in a microdosing ADHD sample: a naturalistic prospective survey study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Dispositional Mindfulness and Self-Compassion Buffer the Effects of COVID-19 Stress on Depression and Anxiety Symptoms.Mindfulness · 2022Article
- The Validity and Reliability of the Short Form of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in Japan.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Article
- Dismantling Mindfulness-Based Programs: A Systematic Review to Identify Active Components of Treatment.Mindfulness · 2020Article
- Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.Mindfulness · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) is a self-report measure of mindfulness with forms of several different lengths, including the FFMQ-39, FFMQ-24, and FFMQ-15. We use item response theory analysis to directly compare the functioning of these three forms.
methodsData were drawn from a non-clinical Amazon Mechanical Turk study (
resultsAll 39 items were strongly related to the facet latent variables, and the items discriminated over a similar range of the latent mindfulness constructs. Items provided more information in the low to medium range of latent mindfulness than in the high range. Scores in three of the five FFMQ-39 facets were unreliable when measuring individuals in the high range of latent mindfulness, resulting from ceiling effects in item responses. Reliability in the high range of mindfulness was further reduced in the FFMQ-24 and FFMQ-15, such that short forms may be ill-suited for applications that require reliable measurement in the high range.
conclusionsResults suggest the existing FFMQ item pool cannot be reduced without negatively affecting either overall reliability or the span of mindfulness over which reliability is assessed. Conditional test reliability curves and item functioning parameters can aid investigators in tailoring their choice of FFMQ form to the reliability they hope to achieve and to the range of latent mindfulness over which they must reliably measure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.