Dispositional Self-Compassion and Mindfulness in a Saudi Community Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Self-compassion and mindfulness are psychological constructs positively associated with well-being; however, they remain under-examined within the Saudi and Arab contexts. Aims: The study aimed to examine levels of dispositional self-compassion and mindfulness in Saudi society and to explore variations by health status and sociodemographic factors. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 595 Saudi adults from the general community, utilising the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) and the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). Results: The participants exhibited above-average dispositional self-compassion and mindfulness. No significant gender differences were observed in total SCS and FFMQ scores. However, males scored higher on the mindfulness subscale and lower on the overidentification subscale of the SCS. Regarding the FFMQ subscales, males showed lower observing scores and higher nonreactivity scores than females. Participants reporting psychological issues showed lower levels of both total self-compassion and mindfulness. Discussion: The results were interpreted in light of specific cultural aspects of Saudi society, specifically collectivism and religion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".