Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Previous article
Next article
Original Article

Assessing the Psychometric Properties of the Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences (CHIME) Using Rasch Analysis

Published Online:February 16, 2018https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000453

Abstract

Abstract. Mindfulness-based interventions are found beneficial to improving well-being and alleviating symptoms of psychological distress, although accurate measurement of the psychological construct of mindfulness remains a challenge. Theoretical work has highlighted characteristics of mindfulness, which can be assessed comprehensively by the recently developed eight-factor Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences (CHIME). While the instrument has demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties, its ability to discriminate precisely across individual mindfulness levels has not been rigorously investigated. The current study subjected responses of 443 participants to Rasch analysis to investigate and enhance the psychometric properties of the CHIME. The best fit to the Rasch model was achieved for every individual subscale with only minor modifications that involved combining some locally dependent items into a testlet. The total scale was then fitted to the Rasch model with individual subscales treated as testlets, and the best model fit was attained after two correlated subscales were treated as a single testlet, χ2(63) = 70.76, p = .23. Therefore, it was possible to generate ordinal-to-interval conversion tables for individual subscales and the total scale scores, which increase the instrument’s precision. The results support internal construct validity and enhance psychometric properties of the CHIME.

References

  • Allen, M. J. & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction on to measurement theory. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Andrich, D., Sheridan, B. & Luo, G. (2009). RUMM 2030. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Laboratory. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Baer, R., Smith, G. T. & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment, 11, 191–206. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Baer, R., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J. & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27–45. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bennett, K. & Dorjee, D. (2016). The impact of a mindfulness-based stress reduction course (MBSR) on well-being and academic attainment of sixth-form students. Mindfulness, 7, 105–114. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W. & Kupper, Z. (2013). The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness, 4, 191–202. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W. & Kupper, Z. (2014). Konstruktion und erste Validierung eines Fragebogens zur umfassenden Erfassung von Achtsamkeit [Construction and initial validation of a questionnaire for the comprehensive investigation of mindfulness]. Diagnostica, 60, 111–125. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Brogden, H. E. (1977). The Rasch model, the law of comparative judgment and additive conjoint measurement. Psychometrika, 42, 631–634. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Brown, K. W. & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822–884. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Buchheld, N., Grossman, P. & Walach, H. (2001). Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (vipassana) and meditation-based psychotherapy: The development of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Journal for Meditation and Meditation Research, 1, 11–34. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Chambers, R., Gullone, E. & Allen, N. B. (2009). Mindfulness emotion regulation: An integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review, 29, 560–572. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Christensen, K. B., Makransky, G. & Horton, M. C. (2017). Critical values for Yen’s Q3: Identification of local dependence in the Rasch model using Residual Correlations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 4, 178–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621616677520 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Goh, H. E., Marais, I. & Ireland, M. J. (2017). A Rasch model analysis of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale. Assessment, 24, 387–398. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A. & Oh, D. (2010). The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and depression: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, 169–183. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Johnson, C., Burke, C., Brinkman, S. & Wade, T. (2016). Development and validation of a multifactor scale in youth: The Comprehensive Inventory of Mindfulness Experiences – Adolescents (CHIME-A). Psychological Assessment, 29, 264–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000342 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994). Wherever you go, there you are: mindfulness meditation in everyday life. New York, NY: Hyperion. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7, 328. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Lundgren-Nilsson, Å., Jonsdottir, I. H., Ahlborg, G. & Tennant, A. (2013). Construct validity of the Psychological General Well Being Index (PGWBI) in a sample of patients undergoing treatment for stress-related exhaustion: A Rasch analysis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 11, 2. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrica, 47, 149–174. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Feng, X. J., Billington, D. R., Jang, J. Y. & Krägeloh, C. U. (2016). Measuring trait mindfulness: How to improve the precision of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale using a Rasch model. Mindfulness, 7, 384–395. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Kersten, P. & Krägeloh, C. U. (2016). Rasch analysis of the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Mindfulness, 7, 466–478. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Medvedev, O. N., Siegert, R. J., Kersten, P. & Krägeloh, C. U. (2017). Improving the precision of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire using a Rasch approach. Mindfulness, 8, 995–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0676-8 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Norquist, J. M., Fitzpatrick, R., Dawson, J. & Jenkinson, C. (2004). Comparing alternative Rasch-based methods vs raw scores in measuring change in health. Medical Care, 42, I25–I36. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Park, T., Reilly-Spong, M. & Gross, C. R. (2013). Mindfulness: A systematic review of instruments to measure an emergent patient-reported outcome (PRO). Quality of Life Research, 22, 2639–2659. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment test. Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Institute for Educational Research. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Rasch, G. (1961). On general laws and the meaning of measurement in psychology. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (pp. 321–334). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sauer, S., Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Ives, J. & Kohls, N. (2013). Specific objectivity of mindfulness – a Rasch analysis of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory. Mindfulness, 4, 45–54. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Siegert, R. J., Tennant, A. & Turner-Stokes, L. (2010). Rasch analysis of the Beck Depression Inventory-II in a neurological rehabilitation sample. Disability and Rehabilitation, 32, 8–17. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Smith, E. V. (2002). Detecting and evaluation the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. Journal of Applied Measurement, 3, 205–231. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Stucki, G., Daltroy, L., Katz, J. N., Johannesson, M. & Liang, M. H. (1996). Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures: The whole may not equal the sum of the parts. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 711–717. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Tennant, A. & Conaghan, P. G. (2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis and Rheumatism, 57, 1358–1362. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Tennant, A. & Pallant, J. F. (2006). Unidimensionality matters! (a tale of two Smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20, 1048–1051. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wainer, H. & Kiely, G. L. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: A case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 185–201. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmüller, V., Kleinknecht, N. & Schmidt, S. (2006). Measuring mindfulness – the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI). Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1543–1555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.025 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Zoogman, S., Goldberg, S. B., Hoyt, W. T. & Miller, L. (2015). Mindfulness interventions with youth: A meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 6, 290–302. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar