The Validity and Reliability of the Short Form of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in Japan

• Published in: Frontiers in psychology 2022-04, Vol.13, p.833381-833381
• Main Authors: Takahashi, Toru, Saito, Junichi, Fujino, Masahiro, Sato, Masashi, Kumano, Hiroaki
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: five facet mindfulness questionnaire; method effects; mindfulness; Psychology; psychometrics; short form; wording effects
• ISSN: 1664-1078; 1664-1078
• DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.833381

A brief measure of dispositional mindfulness is important for applied research on mindfulness. Although short forms of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), which measures the five aspects of mindfulness (i.e., observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-judging, and non-reactivity), have been developed worldwide, the validity and reliability of the Japanese version has not been examined. This study aims to examine the validity and reliability of the 24-item and 15-item versions of the FFMQ in Japan, which are the most widely used versions worldwide. Online surveys were conducted for 889 adults in Japan through an online survey company using self-reported questionnaires including the FFMQ to confirm the factor structure and validity. To examine construct validity, we examined the relationship between the short form of FFMQ and mind wandering, interoceptive awareness, experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, openness, neuroticism, self-compassion, depression, and anxiety, which have been theoretically or empirically shown to be related to mindfulness. In addition, 137 adults responded to the FFMQ again, after four weeks, for the test-retest reliability. The correlated five-factor and four-factor (excluding observing) models and the higher-order factor hierarchical model did not show sufficient goodness of fit, while the 24-item version showed acceptable fit when uncorrelated method factors loaded on by the positive and negative (reverse-scored) items were added. However, the 15-item version did not show acceptable fits for any of the models. Regarding reliability, the 24-item version showed acceptable values. In terms of the relationship between the original and the shortened version of the FFMQ, the 24-item version shared approximately 80% of the variance with the original one. In addition, although the wording effects of positive and negative items seemed to affect the correlations between the FFMQ and the other scales, the associations with related concepts were as predicted generally, supporting the construct validity of the short form of the FFMQ. In Japan, the 24-item version of FFMQ showed acceptable validity and reliability similar to the original version, and we recommend that the 24-item version be used.