Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire

William E. Pelham, Oscar Gonzalez, Stephen A. Metcalf, Cady L. Whicker, Katie Witkiewitz, Lisa A. Marsch, David P. Mackinnon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this issue using factor analytic methods. Methods: Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receiving aftercare for substance use disorder. Results: Parallel analysis suggested multiple factors for all five facets, in both samples. Exploratory factor models suggested the presence of method factors on the acting with awareness (items using the term “distraction”) and describing facets (items that were reverse-scored). Confirmatory factor models fit poorly for all facets, in both samples. In follow-up analyses, model fit improved substantially on the acting with awareness and describing facets when method factors were included in a bifactor model. Model fit was also better for the facets of FFMQ short forms than for the full-length facets. The short-form facets and original facets correlated similarly with external criteria in both samples. Conclusions: None of the FFMQ facets fit a unidimensional factor model; yet, follow-up analyses suggested that each can be considered substantively unidimensional. Initial tests suggest that the facets’ multidimensionality did not materially impact their relation to other psychological constructs, suggesting that multidimensionality can be ignored for some purposes. The use of short-form facets or latent variable models (e.g., bifactor specifications) are both viable solutions for addressing multidimensionality when desired.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalMindfulness
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Mindfulness
questionnaire
Aftercare
Psychometrics
Substance-Related Disorders
Psychology
after-care
Surveys and Questionnaires
psychometrics

Keywords

  • Dimensionality
  • Factor analysis
  • FFMQ
  • Mindfulness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Health(social science)
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Pelham, W. E., Gonzalez, O., Metcalf, S. A., Whicker, C. L., Witkiewitz, K., Marsch, L. A., & Mackinnon, D. P. (Accepted/In press). Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. Mindfulness. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01235-2

Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. / Pelham, William E.; Gonzalez, Oscar; Metcalf, Stephen A.; Whicker, Cady L.; Witkiewitz, Katie; Marsch, Lisa A.; Mackinnon, David P.

In: Mindfulness, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pelham, William E. ; Gonzalez, Oscar ; Metcalf, Stephen A. ; Whicker, Cady L. ; Witkiewitz, Katie ; Marsch, Lisa A. ; Mackinnon, David P. / Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. In: Mindfulness. 2019.
@article{9883525984ea40338e6b7c71b43ec052,
title = "Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire",
abstract = "Objective: Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this issue using factor analytic methods. Methods: Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receiving aftercare for substance use disorder. Results: Parallel analysis suggested multiple factors for all five facets, in both samples. Exploratory factor models suggested the presence of method factors on the acting with awareness (items using the term “distraction”) and describing facets (items that were reverse-scored). Confirmatory factor models fit poorly for all facets, in both samples. In follow-up analyses, model fit improved substantially on the acting with awareness and describing facets when method factors were included in a bifactor model. Model fit was also better for the facets of FFMQ short forms than for the full-length facets. The short-form facets and original facets correlated similarly with external criteria in both samples. Conclusions: None of the FFMQ facets fit a unidimensional factor model; yet, follow-up analyses suggested that each can be considered substantively unidimensional. Initial tests suggest that the facets’ multidimensionality did not materially impact their relation to other psychological constructs, suggesting that multidimensionality can be ignored for some purposes. The use of short-form facets or latent variable models (e.g., bifactor specifications) are both viable solutions for addressing multidimensionality when desired.",
keywords = "Dimensionality, Factor analysis, FFMQ, Mindfulness",
author = "Pelham, {William E.} and Oscar Gonzalez and Metcalf, {Stephen A.} and Whicker, {Cady L.} and Katie Witkiewitz and Marsch, {Lisa A.} and Mackinnon, {David P.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s12671-019-01235-2",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Mindfulness",
issn = "1868-8527",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating the Factor Structure of Each Facet of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire

AU - Pelham, William E.

AU - Gonzalez, Oscar

AU - Metcalf, Stephen A.

AU - Whicker, Cady L.

AU - Witkiewitz, Katie

AU - Marsch, Lisa A.

AU - Mackinnon, David P.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Objective: Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this issue using factor analytic methods. Methods: Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receiving aftercare for substance use disorder. Results: Parallel analysis suggested multiple factors for all five facets, in both samples. Exploratory factor models suggested the presence of method factors on the acting with awareness (items using the term “distraction”) and describing facets (items that were reverse-scored). Confirmatory factor models fit poorly for all facets, in both samples. In follow-up analyses, model fit improved substantially on the acting with awareness and describing facets when method factors were included in a bifactor model. Model fit was also better for the facets of FFMQ short forms than for the full-length facets. The short-form facets and original facets correlated similarly with external criteria in both samples. Conclusions: None of the FFMQ facets fit a unidimensional factor model; yet, follow-up analyses suggested that each can be considered substantively unidimensional. Initial tests suggest that the facets’ multidimensionality did not materially impact their relation to other psychological constructs, suggesting that multidimensionality can be ignored for some purposes. The use of short-form facets or latent variable models (e.g., bifactor specifications) are both viable solutions for addressing multidimensionality when desired.

AB - Objective: Nearly all studies treat the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire as five independent scales (one measuring each of the five facets), yet almost no methodological work has examined the psychometric structure of the facets independently. We address this issue using factor analytic methods. Methods: Exploratory and confirmatory factor models were fit to item response data from a sample of 522 adults recruited online. Findings were replicated in a sample of 454 adults receiving aftercare for substance use disorder. Results: Parallel analysis suggested multiple factors for all five facets, in both samples. Exploratory factor models suggested the presence of method factors on the acting with awareness (items using the term “distraction”) and describing facets (items that were reverse-scored). Confirmatory factor models fit poorly for all facets, in both samples. In follow-up analyses, model fit improved substantially on the acting with awareness and describing facets when method factors were included in a bifactor model. Model fit was also better for the facets of FFMQ short forms than for the full-length facets. The short-form facets and original facets correlated similarly with external criteria in both samples. Conclusions: None of the FFMQ facets fit a unidimensional factor model; yet, follow-up analyses suggested that each can be considered substantively unidimensional. Initial tests suggest that the facets’ multidimensionality did not materially impact their relation to other psychological constructs, suggesting that multidimensionality can be ignored for some purposes. The use of short-form facets or latent variable models (e.g., bifactor specifications) are both viable solutions for addressing multidimensionality when desired.

KW - Dimensionality

KW - Factor analysis

KW - FFMQ

KW - Mindfulness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074432862&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074432862&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12671-019-01235-2

DO - 10.1007/s12671-019-01235-2

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85074432862

JO - Mindfulness

JF - Mindfulness

SN - 1868-8527

ER -