Buddhaditya Padhi, Nilamadhab Kar, Brajaballav Kar
{"title":"Mindfulness in Different Sociodemographic Strata: Partial Validation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale in an Indian Sample","authors":"Buddhaditya Padhi, Nilamadhab Kar, Brajaballav Kar","doi":"10.4103/aip.aip_42_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n Mindfulness-based interventions are increasing in clinical and nonclinical populations. It is important to have a culturally validated instrument to measure the construct.\n \n \n \n We intended to evaluate the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) in an Indian sample, for its reliability and dimensionality along with any differences among the sociodemographic strata.\n \n \n \n The design of the study was an online-based survey.\n \n \n \n An anonymous survey was conducted involving adult participants with a convenience and snowball sampling method. Mindfulness based on MAAS responses and demographic details were collected.\n \n \n \n Cronbach’s alpha, t-test, analysis of variance, Tukey’s honestly significant difference test, and factor analysis were used for analysis.\n \n \n \n The average mindfulness score was 4.3 ± 0.78, and skewness was − 0.39. The score was normally distributed. The reliability for the MAAS (Cronbach’s α =0.830) was acceptable. The split-half reliability correlation was 0.66. The mean of item scores varied from 3.52 to 4.85, and the standard deviation varied from 1.2 to 1.6. The factor analysis explained 53% variance and identified four factors named as “inattention to the present,” “lost in thought,” “lack of circumstantial awareness,” and “late realization of feelings.” MAAS scores were significantly different across age, marital status, and occupation but did not differ by gender, education, or economic status.\n \n \n \n It appears that MAAS can be used in the Indian population; however, there is a need for further validation studies, in different specific populations.\n","PeriodicalId":52916,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Indian Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Indian Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aip.aip_42_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mindfulness-based interventions are increasing in clinical and nonclinical populations. It is important to have a culturally validated instrument to measure the construct.
We intended to evaluate the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) in an Indian sample, for its reliability and dimensionality along with any differences among the sociodemographic strata.
The design of the study was an online-based survey.
An anonymous survey was conducted involving adult participants with a convenience and snowball sampling method. Mindfulness based on MAAS responses and demographic details were collected.
Cronbach’s alpha, t-test, analysis of variance, Tukey’s honestly significant difference test, and factor analysis were used for analysis.
The average mindfulness score was 4.3 ± 0.78, and skewness was − 0.39. The score was normally distributed. The reliability for the MAAS (Cronbach’s α =0.830) was acceptable. The split-half reliability correlation was 0.66. The mean of item scores varied from 3.52 to 4.85, and the standard deviation varied from 1.2 to 1.6. The factor analysis explained 53% variance and identified four factors named as “inattention to the present,” “lost in thought,” “lack of circumstantial awareness,” and “late realization of feelings.” MAAS scores were significantly different across age, marital status, and occupation but did not differ by gender, education, or economic status.
It appears that MAAS can be used in the Indian population; however, there is a need for further validation studies, in different specific populations.