Portuguese validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised and the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale

Ricardo J. Teixeira, Gabriela Ferreira, M. Graça Pereira
{"title":"Portuguese validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised and the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale","authors":"Ricardo J. Teixeira,&nbsp;Gabriela Ferreira,&nbsp;M. Graça Pereira","doi":"10.1016/j.mincom.2017.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>The purpose of this study was the validation of two instruments: Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R) and the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS) in a non-clinical Portuguese sample.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Participants were 168 undergraduates (123 women), aged 18–50 years old (<em>M</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->22; <em>SD</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->5.94). Participants answered the following instruments: Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R); Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS); Portuguese version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale; and Separation/Individuation Process Inventory.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The factorial analysis for the CAMS-R yielded a 9-items one factor with adequate internal consistency (.76). For PHLMS, the results showed a clear two-factor structure with exactly the same structure as the original version, and with adequate internal consistencies: awareness (.77) and acceptance (.85). The quality of mindfulness (CAMS-R) was positively correlated with awareness and acceptance (PHLMS), and negatively with self-differentiation (more problematic) and alexithymia.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Both instruments seem to present adequate psychometric properties to be used in the Portuguese population.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":92426,"journal":{"name":"Mindfulness & compassion","volume":"2 1","pages":"Pages 3-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.mincom.2017.03.001","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mindfulness & compassion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S244540791630043X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was the validation of two instruments: Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R) and the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS) in a non-clinical Portuguese sample.

Methods

Participants were 168 undergraduates (123 women), aged 18–50 years old (M = 22; SD = 5.94). Participants answered the following instruments: Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R); Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS); Portuguese version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale; and Separation/Individuation Process Inventory.

Results

The factorial analysis for the CAMS-R yielded a 9-items one factor with adequate internal consistency (.76). For PHLMS, the results showed a clear two-factor structure with exactly the same structure as the original version, and with adequate internal consistencies: awareness (.77) and acceptance (.85). The quality of mindfulness (CAMS-R) was positively correlated with awareness and acceptance (PHLMS), and negatively with self-differentiation (more problematic) and alexithymia.

Conclusion

Both instruments seem to present adequate psychometric properties to be used in the Portuguese population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认知和情感正念量表的葡萄牙语验证-修订和费城正念量表
目的本研究的目的是验证两种工具:认知和情感正念量表-修订版(CAMS-R)和费城正念量表(PHLMS)在非临床葡萄牙样本中的有效性。方法研究对象为168名大学生(123名女性),年龄18-50岁(M = 22;sd = 5.94)。参与者回答了以下工具:认知和情感正念量表-修订(CAMS-R);费城正念量表;葡萄牙语版多伦多述情障碍量表;和分离/个性化过程清单。结果CAMS-R的因子分析结果为9项单因子,具有良好的内部一致性(0.76)。对于PHLMS,结果显示出清晰的双因素结构,与原版本结构完全相同,并且具有足够的内部一致性:意识(0.77)和接受(0.85)。正念质量(CAMS-R)与意识和接受(PHLMS)呈正相关,与自我分化(问题较多)和述情障碍呈负相关。结论两种工具似乎都具有足够的心理测量特性,可以在葡萄牙人群中使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Set shifting reaction-time improves following meditation or simple breathcounting in meditators and meditation-naïve participants: Data from naturalistic, ecological momentary-assessment devices An empirical investigation into the cognitive and relational dynamics of mindfulness: Adult attachment security mediates the relationship between mindfulness and naïve dialecticalism Mindfulness-based stress reduction training program increases psychological well-being, and emotional regulation, but not attentional performance. A pilot study Mindfulness is not enough: Why equanimity holds the key to compassion El rol de mindfulness en la regulación emocional de la depresión
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1