Psychometric Properties of the Polish Version of the Mindful Self-Care Scale-Standard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives The Mindful Self-Care Scale-Standard (MSCS-Standard) is a 33-item self-report questionnaire that assesses mindfulness practices in six self-care domains: (1) physical care, (2) mindful relaxation, (3) supportive structure, (4) supportive relationships, (5) mindful awareness, and (6) self-compassion and purpose. The study aimed to validate the Polish version of the MSCS-Standard. Method The study was performed on a sample of 774 people (646 females, 122 males, and 6 non-binary) aged 18–76 ( M = 28.49, SD = 10.81). The factor structure was verified with confirmatory factor analysis. Convergent and divergent validity were assessed based on the relationship between the MSCS-Standard scores and markers of alexithymia, anxiety, depression, stress, and somatic symptoms as well as life satisfaction. We examined discriminant validity by conducting a second-order exploratory factor analysis of MSCS-Standard subscales, alexithymia traits, anxiety, depression, stress, and somatic symptoms. Results Our results indicated a good factorial validity, conforming to the intended 6-factor structure (χ 2 /df = 1352.38/477; CFI = 0.912; RMSEA = 0.051 [90% CI: 0.048; 0.055]; SRMR = 0.064). As expected, all MSCS-Standard subscales correlated in expected directions with markers of alexithymia, anxiety, depression, stress, and somatic symptoms as well as with life satisfaction. The MSCS-Standard showed a good discriminant validity in terms of measuring mindfulness practices construct that was separable from people’s current levels of alexithymia, negative affect and somatic symptoms. Internal consistency reliability was also good. Conclusions Overall, the Polish version of the MSCS-Standard appears to have satisfactory psychometric properties. Preregistration This study is not preregistered.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".