{rfName}
A

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

44

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Lecuona, OAuthorDe Rivas, SAuthor

Share

September 27, 2022
Publications
>
Article
No

A Network Analysis of the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ)

Publicated to:Mindfulness. 12 (9): 2281-2294 - 2021-09-01 12(9), DOI: 10.1007/s12671-021-01704-7

Authors: Lecuona, Oscar; Garcia-Rubio, Carlos; de Rivas, Sara; Moreno-Jimenez, Jennifer E; Marta Meda-Lara, Rosa; Rodriguez-Carvajal, Raquel

Affiliations

Autonomous Univ Madrid, Fac Psychol, Dept Biol & Hlth Psychol, Ivan Pavlov St 6, E-28049 Madrid, Spain - Author
King Juan Carlos Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Mostoles, Spain - Author
Univ Guadalajara, Hlth Sci Univ Ctr, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico - Author

Abstract

Objectives The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ) is a popular self-report instrument for mindfulness assessment. However, several studies report mixed evidence regarding its reliability and validity. While recent replication studies have shown several issues regarding its latent structure, first-order facets seemed to replicate successfully. This study proposes an exploratory approach to these facets on an item level in one sample, with cross-validation in another sample. Methods Using a snowball sampling, 1008 participants were recruited in the first sample. Psychometric networks were applied to explore relations between items and item clusters. We compared these exploratory latent variable proposals with previous literature. A second sample of 1210 participants was collected from an FFMQ validation study, and confirmatory factor analyses were applied to cross-validate findings on the first sample. Results The FFMQ showed a positively correlated network. Exploratory analyses suggested the 5-facet structure as stable with alternatives of 4-facet (merging Observe and Non-Judging) and 6-facet (splitting Acting with Awareness in two) solutions. However, the CFAs in the second sample did not provide clear support to any solution. Conclusions The FFMQ showed unclear evidence on its latent structure. We propose researchers and users of the FFMQ to use the most fitting solution between the 5 and 6-facet solutions in their data, since the 4-facet solution is difficult to interpret. We also propose cautionary notes and guidelines for researchers and applied users of the FFMQ and regarding this instrument. We conclude that more research is needed in mindfulness assessment to provide robust measurements.

Keywords

Confirmatory factor analysisConstruct-validityExploratory graph analysisFfmqMindfulnessNetwork analysisPsychometric networksSelf

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Mindfulness due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2021, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Health (Social Science). Notably, the journal is positioned above the 90th percentile.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 1.53. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 6.49 (source consulted: Dimensions Jul 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-07-05, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 21
  • Scopus: 13

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-05:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 41.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 41 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 4.05.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 6 (Altmetric).

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Mexico.

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author (Lecuona de la Cruz, Oscar) .