IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v8y2015i04p710-723_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Mindfulness Measures To Choose To Use?

Author

Listed:
  • Qu, Yuanmei (Elly)
  • Dasborough, Marie T.
  • Todorova, Gergana

Abstract

Hyland, Lee, and Mills (2015) specified the two most popular scales for mindfulness: the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI; 30 items, Buchheld, Grossman, & Walach, 2001; 14 items, Walach, Buchheld, Buttenmüller, Kleinknecht, & Schmidt, 2006) and the Mindfulness Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS; Brown & Ryan, 2003). However, the popularity of these measures does not necessarily mean that they are of high quality. Especially considering the complex epistemology and ontology of the mindfulness construct, we should apply mindfulness assessments with caution. More specially, according to item development theorists in the industrial and organizational (I-O) area (see Hinkin, 1998; Hinkin & Tracey, 1999; Kerlinger & Lee, 2000; Schriesheim, Powers, Scandura, Gardiner, & Lankau, 1993), scholars must select measures that have (a) a clear operational definition; (b) alignment between definition and measure (content validity); (c) high reliability and (d) high construct validity; and (e) high criterion-related validity. However, it is not clear which of the available mindfulness assessments satisfies these criteria and to what extent. In this commentary, we assess currently used measures based on these criteria and provide directions for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Qu, Yuanmei (Elly) & Dasborough, Marie T. & Todorova, Gergana, 2015. "Which Mindfulness Measures To Choose To Use?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 710-723, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:8:y:2015:i:04:p:710-723_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942615001054/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tomay Solomon & Behzad Esmaeili, 2021. "Examining the Relationship between Mindfulness, Personality, and National Culture for Construction Safety," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Jessica M. Nicklin & Emily J. Meachon & Laurel A. McNall, 2019. "Balancing Work, School, and Personal Life among Graduate Students: a Positive Psychology Approach," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 14(5), pages 1265-1286, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:8:y:2015:i:04:p:710-723_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.