Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of the Southampton Mindfulness Questionnaire

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 1) Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, Assistant Professor of Clinical Psychology Department, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Iran

2 دانشگاه علوم پزشکی کرمانشاه

3 3) Ph.D. student in clinical psychology, School of Behavioral Sciences and Mental Health (Tehran Psychiatric Institute), Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 4) Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, Associate Professor of Clinical Psychology Department, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: In recent years, mindfulness-based research has been developed. Many tools have been developed to measuring mindfulness in adults, one of the most important is the Southampton Questionnaire. The purpose of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the Southampton Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Method: To determine the psychometric properties and factor analysis of this scale. A sample of 200 students (100 boys and 100 girls) were selected from Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences through convenience sampling. Self-compassion Scale – Shor t Form was used for convergent validity, and depression, anxiety, stress and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule were used for divergent validity. To analyze the data, correlation coefficient and exploratory factor analysis were used with SPSS-20 software.

Results: In the exploratory factor analysis three factors were obtained the three factor structure that in total, 50/51% of the total variance of mindfulness was explained. The results also showed that the Southampton questionnaire had a good convergence validity with self-compassion (0/59) and positive affect (0/40) and good divergent validity with negative affect (-0/35), depression scale (-0/36), anxiety (-0/30) and stress (-0/50). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was obtained for the first factor,0/78 the second factor 0/69 and the third factor 0/62.

Conclusion: It could be concluded that the Southampton Mindfulness Questionnaire has approperiate psychometric properties in the student community. The findings of the present study indicate that the Southampton Mindfulness Questionnaire can be reliable tool for assessing the level of mindfulness.

Keywords: Mindfulness, Psychometric Properties, Exploratory Factor Analysis.

Keywords

References

1. Kabat‐Zinn J. Mindfulness‐based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clinical psychology: Science and practice. 2003; 10(2): 144-56.
2. Baer RA, Smith GT, Allen KB. Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment. 2004; 11(3): 191-206.
3. Brown KW, Ryan RM. The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology. 2003; 84(4): 822.
4. Emanuel AS, Updegraff JA, Kalmbach DA, Ciesla JA. The role of mindfulness facets in affective forecasting. Personality and Individual Differences. 2010; 49(7): 815-8.
5. Siegel RD. The mindful solution: Everyday practices for everyday problems. New York: Guilford. 2010.
6. Baer RA. Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review. Clinical psychology: Science and practice. 2003; 10(2): 125-43.
7. K.Germer C, Siegel RD, Fulta PR. Mindfulness and psychotherapy. Guilford Press New York, NY; 2005.
8. Buchheld N, Grossman P, Walach H. Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (Vipassana) and meditationbased psychotherapy: The development of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). JMMR. 2001.
9. Baer RA, Smith, G. T & Allen, K. B. Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessmen,. 2004:, 11(3): 191-206.
10. Feldman G, Hayes A, Kumar S, Greeson J, Laurenceau J-P. Mindfulness and emotion regulation: The development and initial validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 2007; 29(3): 177.
11. Baer RA, Smith GT, Hopkins J, Krietemeyer J, Toney L. Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment. 2006; 13(1):27-45.
12. Bergomi C, Tschacher W, Kupper Z. The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness. 2013;4(3):191-202.
13. Chadwick P, Hember M, Symes J, Peters E, Kuipers E, Dagnan D. Responding mindfully to unpleasant thoughts and images: reliability and validity of the Southampton mindfulness questionnaire (SMQ). British Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2008; 47(4): 451-5.
14. Khanjani.S, Foroughi.A, Sadeghi.Kh, BA. Psychometric Features of Iranian Version SelfCompassion Questionnaire (Short Form). Research journal of Shaheed Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. 1395.
15. khanjani.S FA, Sadeghi K, Bahrainian SA. Psychometric properties of Iranian version of self- compassion scale(short form) Pejouhanheh. 2016; 21(5): 282-9.
16. Antony MM, Bieling PJ, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Swinson RP. Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological assessment. 1998; 10(2): 176.
17. Samani S JB. A study of Reliability and Validity of Short Form Depression Scale of Anxiety and Stress. Social Sciences and Human Sciences University of Shiraz. 1386; 3(26): 65-78.
18. Bakhshipour R, Dezhkam M. A confirmatory factor analysis of the positive affect and negative affect scales (PANAS). 2006.
19. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1988;54(6):1063.
20. Neff KD. The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity. 2003; 2(3): 223-50.
21. Neff K. Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and identity. 2003; 2(2): 85-1011.
22. Williams M, Penman D. Mindfulness: a practical guide to finding peace in a frantic world: Hachette UK. 2011.
 
 
 
 
 
1. Kabat‐Zinn J. Mindfulness‐based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clinical psychology: Science and practice. 2003; 10(2): 144-56.
2. Baer RA, Smith GT, Allen KB. Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment. 2004; 11(3): 191-206.
3. Brown KW, Ryan RM. The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology. 2003; 84(4): 822.
4. Emanuel AS, Updegraff JA, Kalmbach DA, Ciesla JA. The role of mindfulness facets in affective forecasting. Personality and Individual Differences. 2010; 49(7): 815-8.
5. Siegel RD. The mindful solution: Everyday practices for everyday problems. New York: Guilford. 2010.
6. Baer RA. Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review. Clinical psychology: Science and practice. 2003; 10(2): 125-43.
7. K.Germer C, Siegel RD, Fulta PR. Mindfulness and psychotherapy. Guilford Press New York, NY; 2005.
8. Buchheld N, Grossman P, Walach H. Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (Vipassana) and meditationbased psychotherapy: The development of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). JMMR. 2001.
9. Baer RA, Smith, G. T & Allen, K. B. Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessmen,. 2004:, 11(3): 191-206.
10. Feldman G, Hayes A, Kumar S, Greeson J, Laurenceau J-P. Mindfulness and emotion regulation: The development and initial validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 2007; 29(3): 177.
11. Baer RA, Smith GT, Hopkins J, Krietemeyer J, Toney L. Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment. 2006; 13(1):27-45.
12. Bergomi C, Tschacher W, Kupper Z. The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness. 2013;4(3):191-202.
13. Chadwick P, Hember M, Symes J, Peters E, Kuipers E, Dagnan D. Responding mindfully to unpleasant thoughts and images: reliability and validity of the Southampton mindfulness questionnaire (SMQ). British Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2008; 47(4): 451-5.
14. Khanjani.S, Foroughi.A, Sadeghi.Kh, BA. Psychometric Features of Iranian Version SelfCompassion Questionnaire (Short Form). Research journal of Shaheed Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. 1395.
15. khanjani.S FA, Sadeghi K, Bahrainian SA. Psychometric properties of Iranian version of self- compassion scale(short form) Pejouhanheh. 2016; 21(5): 282-9.
16. Antony MM, Bieling PJ, Cox BJ, Enns MW, Swinson RP. Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological assessment. 1998; 10(2): 176.
17. Samani S JB. A study of Reliability and Validity of Short Form Depression Scale of Anxiety and Stress. Social Sciences and Human Sciences University of Shiraz. 1386; 3(26): 65-78.
18. Bakhshipour R, Dezhkam M. A confirmatory factor analysis of the positive affect and negative affect scales (PANAS). 2006.
19. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1988;54(6):1063.
20. Neff KD. The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity. 2003; 2(3): 223-50.
21. Neff K. Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and identity. 2003; 2(2): 85-1011.
22. Williams M, Penman D. Mindfulness: a practical guide to finding peace in a frantic world: Hachette UK. 2011.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Volume 11, Issue 2 - Serial Number 42
September 2019
Pages 32-39

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 05 March 2019
  • Revise Date: 01 December 2019
  • Accept Date: 23 April 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics