The Toronto Mindfulness Scale and the State Mindfulness Scale: psychometric properties of the Spanish versions.
Jaime Navarrete, Marta Fontana-Mcnally, Ariadna Colomer-Carbonell, Juan P Sanabria-Mazo, Daniel Pinazo, Antonio-José Silvestre-López, Mark Lau, Galia Tanay, Javier García-campayo, Marcelo Demarzo, Joaquim Soler, Ausiàs Cebolla, Albert Feliu-Soler, Juan V Luciano
Frontiers in psychology January 1, 2023 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1212036 via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThe Spanish versions of the Toronto Mindfulness Scale (TMS) and the State Mindfulness Scale (SMS) show adequate reliability and validity for measuring state mindfulness, though the SMS specific factors have poor reliability when controlling for the general factor. Data from six non-clinical Spanish samples (TMS n=119, SMS n=223) were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis. The best-fitting model for the TMS was a correlated two-factor structure (curiosity and decentering). For the SMS, a bifactor structure (general factor, mindfulness of body, and mindfulness of mind) fit best. Both scales detected changes in state mindfulness after meditation practices. The patterns of correlations with measures of trait mindfulness, decentering, non-attachment, depression, anxiety, stress, affect, self-criticism, and self-reassurance were mostly as expected.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Validation study Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 342 |
| Population | Non-clinical Spanish adults from six samples |
| Keywords | Wlsmv Confirmatory factor analysis Omega-hierarchical Spanish validation State mindfulness scale |
| Citations | 9 |
| Key finding | The Spanish versions of the TMS and SMS are valid measures of state mindfulness, but the specific factors of the SMS have poor reliability when the general factor is controlled. |
Abstract
The Toronto Mindfulness Scale (TMS) and the State Mindfulness Scale (SMS) are two relevant self-report measures of state mindfulness. The purpose of this study was to examine the internal structure and to offer evidence of the reliability and validity of the Spanish versions of the TMS and SMS. Data from six distinct non-clinical samples in Spain were obtained. They responded to the TMS (n = 119), SMS (n = 223), and measures of trait mindfulness, decentering, non-attachment, depression, anxiety, stress, positive and negative affect, self-criticism, and self-reassurance. The internal structure of the TMS and SMS was analyzed through confirmatory factor analysis. Reliability, construct validity, and sensitivity to change analyses were performed. The correlated two-factor structure (curiosity and decentering) was the best-fitting model for the TMS (CFI = 0.932; TLI = 0.913; RMSEA = 0.100 [0.077-0.123]; WRMR = 0.908). The bifactor structure (general factor, mindfulness of body, and mindfulness of mind) was the best-fitting model for the SMS (CFI = 0.961; TLI = 0.950; RMSEA = 0.096 [0.086-0.106]; WRMR = 0.993). Adequate reliability was found for both measures. The reliability of the SMS specific factors was very poor when controlling for the general factor. The patterns of correlations were mainly as expected and according to previous literature. The TMS and SMS have been able to detect state mindfulness changes after different meditation practices. Validity evidence is provided to support the use of the TMS and SMS in Spanish populations, though the reliability of the SMS specific factors merit revision.