A recent study of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire reported high levels of differential item functioning (DIF) for 18 of its 39 items in meditating and nonmeditating samples that were not demographically matched. In particular, meditators were more likely to endorse positively worded items whereas nonmeditators were more likely to deny negatively worded (reverse-scored) items. The present study replicated these analyses in demographically matched samples of meditators and nonmeditators (n = 115 each) and found that evidence for DIF was minimal. There was little or no evidence for differential relationships between positively and negatively worded items for meditators and nonmeditators. Findings suggest that DIF based on items’ scoring direction is not problematic when the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire is used to compare demographically similar meditators and nonmeditators.
Ackerman, T.A. ( 1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.
2.
Baer, R.A., Smith, G.T., & Allen, K.B. ( 2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment, 11, 191-206.
3.
Baer, R.A., Smith, G.T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. ( 2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27-45.
4.
Baer, R.A., Smith, G.T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., . . . Williams, M. ( 2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment, 15, 329-342.
5.
Baum, C., Kuyken, W., Bohus, M., Heidenreich, T., Michalak, J., & Steil, R. (IN PRESS). The psychometric properties of the Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills in clinical populations. Assessment.
6.
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, 822-848.
7.
Carmody, J., & Baer, R.A. ( 2008). Relationships between mindfulness practice and levels of mindfulness, medical and psychological symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 31, 23-33.
8.
Conrad, K.J., Wright, B.D., McKnight, P., McFall, M., Fontana, A., & Rosenheck, R. ( 2004). Comparing traditional and Rasch analyses of the Mississippi PTSD Scale: Revealing limitations of reverse-scored items. Journal of Applied Measurement, 5, 15-30.
9.
Dimidjian, S., & Linehan, M. ( 2003). Defining an agenda for future research on the clinical application of mindfulness practice. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 166-171.
10.
DiStefano, C., & Motl, R. ( 2009). Personality correlates of method effects due to negatively worded items on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 309-313.
11.
Embretson, S.E., & Reise, S.P. ( 2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Finch, W.H., & French, B.F. ( 2008). Anomalous type I error rates for identifying one type of differential item functioning in the presence of the other. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 742.759.
13.
Hazlett-Stevens, H., Ullman, J.B., & Craske, M.G. ( 2004). Factor structure of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire: Examination of a method factor. Assessment, 11, 361-370.
14.
Kabat-Zinn, J. ( 1982). An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: Theoretical considerations and preliminary results. General Hospital Psychiatry , 4, 33-47.
15.
Kabat-Zinn, J. ( 1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York, NY : Delacorte.
16.
Liu, I., & Agresti, A. ( 1996). Mantel-Haenszel type inference for cumulative odds ratios with a stratified ordinal response. Biometrics, 52, 1223-1234.
17.
Lykins, E.L., & Baer, R.A. ( 2009). Psychological functioning in a sample of long-term practitioners of mindfulness meditation. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy , 23, 226-241.
18.
Marsh, H.W. ( 1996). Positive and negative global self-esteem: A substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 810-819.
19.
Mazor, K.M., Clauser, B.E., & Hambleton, R.K. (1992). The effect of sample size on the functioning of the Mantel-Haenszel statistic. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 443-451.
20.
Nunnally, J.C. ( 1967). Psychometric theory. New York, NY : McGraw Hill.
21.
Paulhus, D.L. ( 1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17-59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22.
Penfield, R.D. ( 2007a). An approach for categorizing DIF in polytomous items . Applied Measurement in Education, 20, 335-355.
Penfield, R.D., & Algina, J. ( 2006). A generalized DIF effect variance estimator for measuring unsigned differential test functioning in mixed format tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 295-312.
25.
Rodebaugh, T.L., Woods, C.M., & Heimberg, R.G. (2007). The reverse of social anxiety is not always the opposite: The reverse-scored items of the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale do not belong. Behavior Therapy, 38, 192-206.
26.
Van Dam, N.T., Earleywine, M., & Danoff-Burg, S. (2009). Differential item functioning across meditators and nonmeditators on the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire . Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 516-521.
27.
Zumbo, B.D. ( 1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item score. Ottawa , Ontario, Canada: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
