Nomological Network of Dispositional Mindfulness: Evidence from MIDUS-II and MIDUS-III
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While dispositional mindfulness is a popular construct in the field of positive psychology, its nomological network in the context of health and well-being is not well established. Our study addresses this limitation by examining the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and various health-related psychological constructs, including personality, social well-being, and affective states. Data for this study were gathered from the national longitudinal studies of health and well-being called Midlife in the United States (MIDUS-II and MIDUS-III). The nomological network analysis of dispositional mindfulness showed positive associations with both religiosity and overall well-being measures (e.g., Social Well-Being, Sympathy, Optimism, and Generativity) and negative associations with maladaptive tendencies (e.g., Pessimism, Aggression, Neuroticism, and Personal Constraints). Finally, test-retest validity was positively verified by significant correlations among the variables, spanning over ten years. Articulating a nomological network of dispositional mindfulness has important implications for future research and practice.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".