ArticleJournal of personality2025
On the importance of being clear about the level of analysis of interest: An illustration using the case of self-compassion.
Article in Journal of personality, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- On the Structure of Self-Compassion: A Meta-Analytic Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Self-Compassion Scale.Assessment · 2026Pooled it
- The Role of Self-Compassion and Shame-Proneness Among Anorexia and Bulimia Nervosa.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- When Self-Compassion Lacks Ferocity: Anger and Responding to False Accusations.Journal of personality · 2025Article
- PROTOCOL: Summarizing and Critically Evaluating the Concepts of Self-Compassion: A Systematic Review of Conceptualizations.Campbell systematic reviews · 2025Article
- On the importance of being clear about the level of analysis of interest: An illustration using the case of self-compassion.Journal of personality · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTheories about within-person (WP) variation are often tested using between-person (BP) research, despite the well-established fact that results may not generalize across levels of analysis. One possible explanation is vague theories that do not specify which level of analysis is of interest. We illustrate such a case using the construct of self-compassion. The factor structure at the BP level has been highly debated, although the theory is actually concerned with relationships at the WP level.
methodMultilevel confirmatory factor analysis was applied to experience-sampling data of self-compassion (N = 213, with n = 4052 measurement occasions).
resultsAt both levels of analysis, evidence for a two-factor model was found. However, the factors were moderately related at the WP level (r = 0.37, p < 0.001) but largely independent at the BP level (r = 0.04, p = 0.696). Exploratory analyses revealed considerable heterogeneity in the WP relationship among individuals.
conclusionWe discuss how our results provide new impulses to move the debate around self-compassion forward. Lastly, we outline how the WP level-which is of major interest for self-compassion and other constructs in psychology-can guide the conceptualization and assessment to promote advancements of the theory and resulting applications.
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.