Measuring mindfulness? An Item Response Theory analysis of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale

Abstract The Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) is one of the most popular measures of mindfulness, exhibiting promising psychometric properties and theoretically consistent relationships to brain activity, mindfulness-based intervention (MBI) outcomes, and mediation of MBI effects. The present study investigated the response patterns and scale properties in a large sample of undergraduate students (N = 414) using Item Response Theory analyses. The findings suggest that general statements of “automatic inattentiveness” or “automatic pilot” confer greater statistical information about the underlying latent trait. Evidence of limited abilities to report on mindlessness and of response bias to “mindfulness-absent” items suggests challenges to the construct validity of the MAAS. The current findings, along with pre-existing data, suggest that reverse-scoring the scale may be inadequate to represent intentional attention or awareness. Further research is needed to determine which variations, components, and correlates of the numerous operationalizations of mindfulness are theoretically consistent and most salient to positive outcomes, especially in psychopathology.

[1]  Alice T. Sawyer,et al.  The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and depression: A meta-analytic review. , 2010, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[2]  Z. Segal,et al.  Mindfulness: A Proposed Operational Definition , 2004 .

[3]  Gregory T. Smith,et al.  Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness , 2006, Assessment.

[4]  Phil Wood.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research , 2008 .

[5]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[6]  M. Strauss,et al.  Construct validity: advances in theory and methodology. , 2009, Annual review of clinical psychology.

[7]  J. Michalak,et al.  Mindfulness Predicts Relapse/Recurrence in Major Depressive Disorder After Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy , 2008, The Journal of nervous and mental disease.

[8]  R. Hambleton,et al.  Fundamentals of Item Response Theory , 1991 .

[9]  Stefan G Hofmann,et al.  Acceptance and mindfulness-based therapy: new wave or old hat? , 2008, Clinical psychology review.

[10]  J. Smallwood,et al.  The lights are on but no one’s home: Meta-awareness and the decoupling of attention when the mind wanders , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[11]  N. V. Dam,et al.  Differential item function across meditators and non-meditators on the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire , 2009 .

[12]  P. Grossman.  On measuring mindfulness in psychosomatic and psychological research. , 2008, Journal of psychosomatic research.

[13]  Matthew D. Lieberman,et al.  Neural Correlates of Dispositional Mindfulness During Affect Labeling , 2007, Psychosomatic medicine.

[14]  Brian L. Thompson,et al.  Everyday mindfulness and mindfulness meditation: Overlapping constructs or not? , 2007 .

[15]  Karlijn F. Kuijpers,et al.  Effects of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Intervention on Psychological Well-being and Quality of Life: Is Increased Mindfulness Indeed the Mechanism? , 2008, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[16]  J. Kabat-Zinn,et al.  Full catastrophe living : using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness , 1990 .

[17]  P. Grossman,et al.  Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis , 2004, Journal of Psychosomatic Research.

[18]  Mark R. Leary,et al.  The Multi-Faceted Nature of Mindfulness , 2007 .

[19]  S. Embretson,et al.  Item response theory for psychologists , 2000 .

[20]  F. Baker.  The basics of item response theory , 1985 .

[21]  R. Ryan,et al.  The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  Paul A. Frewen,et al.  Letting Go: Mindfulness and Negative Automatic Thinking , 2008, Cognitive Therapy and Research.

[23]  H. Marsh,et al.  In Search of Golden Rules: Comment on Hypothesis-Testing Approaches to Setting Cutoff Values for Fit Indexes and Dangers in Overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) Findings , 2004 .

[24]  Remo Ostini,et al.  Polytomous Item Response Theory Models , 2005 .

[25]  B. D. Gilbert,et al.  Mindfulness in Thailand and the United States: a case of apples versus oranges? , 2009, Journal of clinical psychology.

[26]  De Ayala,et al.  The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory , 2008 .

[27]  L. Rapgay,et al.  Classical Mindfulness , 2009, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[28]  J. Kabat-Zinn,et al.  Mindfulness-Based Interventions in Context: Past, Present, and Future , 2003 .

[29]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Appropriateness measurement with polychotomous item response models and standardized indices , 1984 .

[30]  F. Samejima.  Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores , 1968 .

[31]  Steven P. Reise,et al.  A Comparison of Item- and Person-Fit Methods of Assessing Model-Data Fit in IRT , 1990 .

[32]  E. Rosch.  More Than Mindfulness: When You Have a Tiger by the Tail, Let It Eat You , 2007 .

[33]  James MacKillop,et al.  Further Psychometric Validation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) , 2007 .

[34]  Fumiko Samejima,et al.  EVALUATION OF MATHEMATICAL MODELS FOR ORDERED POLYCHOTOMOUS RESPONSES , 1996 .