摘要目的 在中国大学生群体中进行费城正念量表(the philadelphia mindfulness scale,PHLMS)的信效度检验.方法 考虑语言和文化的差异翻译PHLMS,以此量表为工具在1 221名大学生中进行调查,并使用正念五因素问卷(FFMQ)、白熊抑制问卷(WBSI)和接纳与行动问卷第二版(AAQ-Ⅱ)进行信效度检验.结果 探索性因素分析发现PHLMS可抽取两个因素,累积方差贡献率40.355％.验证性因素分析表明数据拟合良好(x2/df=2.781,CFI=0.945,NFI=0.884,IFI=0.922,TLI=0.906,CFI=0.922,RMSEA=0.053).觉察分量表的内部一致性信度为0.785,接纳分量表的内部一致性信度为0.772.PHLMS与FFMQ呈显著正相关(r=0.398,P＜0.01),接纳分量表与WBSI呈显著负相关(r=-0.458,P＜0.01),和AAQ-Ⅱ显著负相关(r=-0.288,P＜0.01).结论 PHLMS中文版信效度符合测量学标准.

abstractsObjective To explore the reliability and validity of the preliminary revision of the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS) in Chinese undergraduates.Methods Considering the differences in the cultural and linguistic,the PHLMS was translated and used to conduct a questionnaire survey among 1 221 undergraduates.All participants were also surveyed with five facets mindfulness questionnaire (FFMQ),the white bear suppression inventory (WBSI) and acceptance and action questionnaire-2rd edition (AAQ-Ⅱ) as conduct reliability and validity test.Results The exploratory factor analysis showed that PHLMS could extract two factors,and the cumulative variance contribution rate was 40.355％.The confirmatory factor analysis indicated good fit (x2/df=2.781,CFI =0.945,NFI =0.884,IFI =0.922,TLI =0.906,CFI =0.922,RMSEA =0.053).The internal consistency reliability of the awareness subscales was 0.785,and the internal consistency reliability of the acceptance subscales was 0.772.The correlation coefficients among the PHLMS and FFMQ was significant(r=0.398,P＜0.01).The acceptance subscales were significantly negatively correlated with WBSI and AAQ-Ⅱ(r=-0.458,-0.288,P＜0.01).Conclusion The validity and reliability of the Chinese version of PHLMS meet the measurement criterion.