Psychometric Validation of the Toronto Mindfulness Scale – Trait Version in Chinese College Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Toronto Mindfulness Scale (TMS; Lau et al., 2006) has been widely used to assess the state mindfulness of participants after practicing mindfulness. Recently, a trait version of the Toronto Mindfulness Scale was developed and initially validated (TMS-T; Davis et al., 2009). We further examined the psychometric properties of TMS-T using three hundred and sixty-eight Chinese college students (233 females and 135 males) from a public university in Hong Kong. We found that factor analyses failed to support the existence of two-dimensional structure of the Chinese version of the TMS-T (C-TMS-T). The model fit indices indicated a marginal model fit, and the concurrent and convergent validities of the C-TMS-T were not confirmed. The moderate item-to-subscale fit of the decentering subscale indicated that its structural validity was not satisfactory. In addition, the internal consistency coefficient of the decentering subscale using composite reliability (p = .61) was under the acceptable level. Based on the results, we concluded that the application of the C-TMS-T to the Chinese population is premature. Further validation of the C-TMS-T using another sample of participants is recommended, in particular, individuals with meditation experiences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".