Examining the factor structure of the 39-item and 15-item versions of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire before and after mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for people with recurrent depression
American Psychological Association
This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s). Author(s) grant(s) the American Psychological Association the exclusive right to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.
Research into the effectiveness and mechanisms of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) requires reliable and valid measures of mindfulness. The 39-item Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ-39) is a measure of mindfulness commonly used to assess change before and after MBIs. However, the stability and invariance of the FFMQ factor structure have not yet been tested before and after an MBI; pre to post comparisons may not be valid if the structure changes over this period. Our primary aim was to examine the factor structure of the FFMQ-39 before and after mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) in adults with recurrent depression in remission using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Additionally, we examined whether the factor structure of the 15-item version (FFMQ-15) was consistent with that of the FFMQ-39, and whether it was stable over MBCT. Our secondary aim was to assess the general psychometric properties of both versions. CFAs showed that pre-MBCT, a 4-factor hierarchical model (excluding the "observing" facet) best fit the FFMQ-39 and FFMQ-15 data, whereas post-MBCT, a 5-factor hierarchical model best fit the data for both versions. Configural invariance across the time points was not supported for both versions. Internal consistency and sensitivity to change were adequate for both versions. Both FFMQ versions did not differ significantly from each other in terms of convergent validity. Researchers should consider excluding the Observing subscale from comparisons of total scale/subscale scores before and after mindfulness interventions. Current findings support the use of the FFMQ-15 as an alternative measure in research where briefer forms are needed. (PsycINFO Database Record
Supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust in a joint Doctoral Training Scholarship (Grant ES/J500173/1). Data for this publication were from the PREVENT (Kuyken et al., 2015) and SWAD (J. M. G. Williams et al., 2014) research trials. PREVENT was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) program and NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula (Project 08/56/01). SWAD was funded by the Wellcome Trust Grant (Grant GR067797).
This is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.
Vol. 28, pp. 791 - 802
PubMed Central ID
Place of publication