Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Specific Objectivity of Mindfulness—A Rasch Analysis of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory

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

Abstract

Even as modern research on mindfulness has expanded, debate continues with regard to the measurement and conceptualization of mindfulness. This divergence has manifested in a proliferation of different measurement approaches. The present research contributes to the advancement of mindfulness measurement by performing a Rasch model analysis of the psychometric properties of the short form of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI-14). This rigorous psychometric method belongs to the family item response theory and can be considered to be a set of approaches complementing classical test theory. The FMI-14 was administered to a nonclinical convenience sample of N = 1,452 German adults. Our data showed poor fit to the Rasch model. A reanalysis of the model excluding one particular misfitting item (number 13) yielded an acceptable fit for the originally proposed one-factorial solution to the Rasch model. However, a two-factorial solution with the subfacets “presence” and “acceptance” provided a better overall fit than the unidimensional solution. Some degree of differential item functioning could be observed both in the uni- and two-dimensional solution suggesting that potential exists for improving the measurement quality of the FMI-13. In line with the recent research, it is concluded that the FMI-13 should be considered as a two-dimensional rather than a unidimensional instrument.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43(4), 561–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, E. J., Deary, I. J., & Egan, V. (2006). Individual differences in response scale use: mixed Rasch modelling of responses to NEO-FFI items. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1235–1245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, R. A. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: the Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Assessment, 11(3), 191–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., 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 

  • Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., et al. (2004). Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah: LEA.

    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(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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eid, M., & Zickar, M. J. (2007). Detecting response styles and faking in personality and organizational assessments by mixed Rasch models. Multivariate and mixture distribution Rasch models. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-49839-3_16.

  • Eisendrath, S. J., Delucchi, K., Bitner, R., Fenimore, P., Smit, M., & McLane, M. (2008). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for treatment-resistant depression: a pilot study. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 77(5), 319–320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: LEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G. H., & Molenaar, I. W. (1995). Rasch models: foundations, recent developments, and applications. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59(2), 93–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. A. (1994). Three fundamental emotion systems. In D. Ekman & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotion: fundamental questions (pp. 243–247). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P. (2011). Defining mindfulness by how poorly I think I pay attention during everyday awareness and other intractable problems for psychology’s (re)invention of mindfulness: comment on Brown et al. (2011). Psychological Assessment, 23(4), 1034–1040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P., & Van Dam, N. T. (2011). Mindfulness, by any other name…: trials and tribulations of sati in western psychology and science. Contemporary Buddhism, 12(01), 219–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Höfling, V., Moosbrugger, H., Schermelleh-Engel, K., & Heidenreich, T. (2011). Mindfulness or mindlessness? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 27(1), 59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohls, N., Sauer, S., & Walach, H. (2009). Facets of mindfulness—results of an online study investigating the Freiburg mindfulness inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(2), 224–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh, J., Bowen, S., & Marlatt, G. A. (2005). Spirituality, mindfulness and substance abuse. Addictive Behaviors, 30(7), 1335–1341.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Linacre, J. M. (2010). A user’s guide to WINSTEPS, MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago, IL: Winsteps.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W. (1996). Positive and negative global self-esteem: a substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(4), 810–819.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Masters, G. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (1999). Measurement in psychology: critical history of a methodological concept. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Offenbächer, M., Sauer, S., Hieblinger, R., Hufford, D. J., Walach, H., & Kohls, N. (2011). Spirituality and the international classification of functioning, disability and health: content comparison of questionnaires measuring mindfulness based on the International Classification of Functioning. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(25–26), 2434–2445.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13(1), 25–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raîche, G. (2005). Critical eigenvalue sizes in standardized residual principal components analysis. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 19(1), 1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rost, J. (1991). A logistic mixture distribution model for polychotomous item responses. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 44(1), 75–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rost, J., Carstensen, C. H., & Von Davier, M. (1997). Applying the mixed Rasch model to personality questionnaires. In J. Rost & R. Langeheine (Eds.), Applications of latent trait and latent class models in the social sciences. New York: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, S., Lynch, S., Walach, H., & Kohls, N. (2011a). Dialectics of mindfulness: implications for Western medicine. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 6(1), 10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, S., Walach, H., & Kohls, N. (2011b). Gray’s behavioural inhibition system as a mediator of mindfulness towards well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(4), 506–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, S., Walach, H., Schmidt, S., Hinterberger, T., Horan, M., & Kohls, N. (2011c). Implicit and explicit emotional behavior and mindfulness. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(4), 1558–1569.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, S., Walach, H., Schmidt, S., Hinterberger, T., Lynch, S., Büssing, A., et al. (2012). Assessment of mindfulness: review on state of the art. Mindfulness. doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0122-5.

  • Shapiro, S. L., Bootzin, R. R., Figueredo, A. J., Lopez, A. M., & Schwartz, G. E. (2003). The efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction in the treatment of sleep disturbance in women with breast cancer: an exploratory study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 54(1), 85–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(3), 373–386.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. M., & Miao, C. Y. (1994). Assessing unidimensionality for Rasch measurement. In M. Wilson (Ed.), Objective measurement: theory into practice (vol. 2). Greenwich: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmüller, V., Kleinknecht, N., & Schmidt, S. (2006). Measuring mindfulness—the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Personality and Individual Differences, 40(8), 1543–1555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zickar, M. J., Gibby, R. E., & Robie, C. (2004). Uncovering faking samples in applicant, incumbent, and experimental data sets: an application of mixed-model item response theory. Organizational Research Methods, 7(2), 168–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was made possible by the US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command under Award No. W81XWH-06-1-0279. The views, opinions and/or findings contained in this report are those of the authors and should not be construed as an official DoD position, policy or decision unless so designated by other documentation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Generation Research Program, Human Science Center, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Prof.-Max-Lange-Platz 11, 83646, Bad Tölz, Germany

    Sebastian Sauer & Niko Kohls

  2. Psychology Institute, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany

    Matthias Ziegler & Erik Danay

  3. Brain, Mind and Healing Program, Samueli Institute, Alexandria, VA, USA

    John Ives & Niko Kohls

Authors
  1. Sebastian Sauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthias Ziegler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erik Danay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John Ives
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Niko Kohls
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Sauer.

Appendix

Appendix

Items of the FMI-14

  1. 1

    I am open to the experience of the present moment.

  2. 2

    I sense my body, whether eating, cooking, cleaning or talking

  3. 3

    When I notice an absence of mind, I gently return to the experience of the here and now.

  4. 4

    I am able to appreciate myself.

  5. 5

    I pay attention to what’s behind my actions.

  6. 6

    I see my mistakes and difficulties without judging them.

  7. 7

    I feel connected to my experience in the here-and-now.

  8. 8

    I accept unpleasant experiences.

  9. 9

    I am friendly to myself when things go wrong.

  10. 10

    I watch my feelings without getting lost in them.

  11. 11

    In difficult situations, I can pause without immediately reacting.

  12. 12

    I experience moments of inner peace and ease, even when things get hectic and stressful.

  13. 13

    I am impatient with myself and with others (inversely coded)

  14. 14

    I am able to smile when I notice how I sometimes make life difficult.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sauer, S., Ziegler, M., Danay, E. et al. Specific Objectivity of Mindfulness—A Rasch Analysis of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Mindfulness 4, 45–54 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0145-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0145-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation