Belief in the Powers of Mindfulness Scale (BPMS)

1. Abstract

The Belief in the Powers of Mindfulness Scale (BPMS) is a psychometric instrument developed by Masoumeh Rahmani, Valerie van Mulukom, and Miguel Farias (2023) designed to assess explicit individual beliefs regarding the transformative capacity of mindfulness meditation across intrapersonal, interpersonal, and sociopolitical domains. Developed through an integrative methodological pipeline combining ethnographic fieldwork, thematic narrative analysis of in-depth qualitative interviews, and cross-sectional quantitative validation, the BPMS captures the extent to which individuals ascribe transformative, curative, and prosocial attributes to mindfulness practices. The final scale consists of 9 items evaluated on a six-point bipolar Likert scale ranging from -2.5 (Strongly disagree) to +2.5 (Strongly agree).

Psychometric evaluation in an adult community sample ($N = 373$, aged 18–73 years) drawn from the United States and the United Kingdom confirmed a robust unidimensional structure. Exploratory factor analysis via principal axis factoring revealed that a single general factor accounted for 54.0% of the common variance (eigenvalue = 4.86), with a sharp discontinuity on the scree plot and no secondary factor reaching an eigenvalue above 0.85. The instrument demonstrates high internal consistency reliability, yielding both a Cronbach’s alpha ($\alpha$) of .89 and a McDonald’s omega ($\omega$) of .89. Convergent validity analyses established that stronger beliefs in the powers of mindfulness are significantly associated with longer meditation tenure, higher weekly practice frequency, greater self-reported dispositional mindfulness, and higher levels of self-identified spirituality, while remaining independent of traditional institutional religiosity. The BPMS provides contemplative science and clinical psychology with a standardized tool to quantify participant expectations, secularized spiritual faith, and halo effects that may moderate or confound the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs).

2. Keywords

Mindfulness, Belief in the Powers of Mindfulness Scale, BPMS, Expectancy Effects, Contemplative Science, Meditation Expectations, Secular Spirituality, Psychometrics, Scale Validation, Halo Effects

3. Authors

The Belief in the Powers of Mindfulness Scale was developed and validated through a collaborative cross-institutional research program:

• Masoumeh (Sara) Rahmani, Ph.D.: School of Social and Cultural Studies, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. (Corresponding author: [email protected]).
• Valerie van Mulukom, Ph.D.: Centre for Trust, Peace, and Social Relations, Brain, Belief and Behaviour Lab, Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom.
• Miguel Farias, D.Phil.: Centre for Trust, Peace, and Social Relations, Brain, Belief and Behaviour Lab, Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom. (ORCID: 0000-0001-5925-795X).

4. Purpose

Over the past three decades, mindfulness has migrated from traditional Buddhist monastic frameworks into mainstream Western medicine, clinical psychology, public education, corporate wellness, and popular culture. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) have amassed a substantial empirical literature demonstrating efficacy for affective disorders, chronic pain, and stress regulation. However, critical contemplative science has increasingly highlighted methodological vulnerabilities within this literature, most notably the inadequate control for participant expectancy effects, positive treatment demand, and quasi-religious idealizations surrounding the practice.

The primary purpose of the Belief in the Powers of Mindfulness Scale (BPMS) is to isolate, operationalize, and quantify the specific cognitive credences that individuals hold regarding the transformative potency of mindfulness. Prior to the BPMS, clinical trials routinely lacked an instrument tailored to measure the quasi-panaceic beliefs often broadcast by popular media and contemporary wellness discourse—the premise that mindfulness meditation intrinsically engenders deep personal wisdom, eradicates interpersonal conflict, enhances natural empathy, and holds the sociopolitical power to diminish global violence.

In clinical trials and intervention research, the BPMS serves as an essential measurement tool to evaluate:

• Expectancy and Placebo Confounding: Disentangling specific neurocognitive mechanisms of meditation practice from the psychological outcomes driven by high outcome expectancies, optimistic confirmation biases, and placebo response pathways.
• Differential Treatment Adherence and Attrition: Identifying whether participants with disproportionately elevated BPMS baseline scores experience greater frustration, disengagement, or adverse psychological effects when meditation fails to swiftly deliver radical self-transformation.
• Sociological and Ideological Dissemination: Measuring the cultural penetration of secularized spiritual narratives, allowing sociologists and psychologists of religion to map how contemplative practices function as non-theistic belief systems across diverse demographics.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct measured by the BPMS is the multidomain cognitive appraisal of mindfulness meditation as an inherently transformative agent. Rather than assessing an individual’s current capacity for attentional control or present-moment awareness (as measured by scales such as the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale [MAAS] or the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire [FFMQ]), the BPMS measures an ideological and evaluative construct: the degree to which an individual attributes expansive, ethical, psychological, and global restorative powers to the practice of mindfulness.

Although psychometric reduction indicates that these beliefs coalesce into a robust unidimensional structure in non-clinical adult populations, thematic grounded development demonstrates that this overarching construct spans four interrelated narrative facets:

Intrapersonal Self-Insight and Wisdom

This facet captures the epistemic belief that mindfulness serves as a reliable introspective technology enabling the practitioner to discover hidden, authentic truths about the self. It conceptualizes meditation not merely as an attentional exercise, but as an internal cognitive map leading toward profound self-actualization, ethical awareness of one’s own behavioral shortcomings, and the attainment of philosophical wisdom (e.g., Item 6: “Mindfulness Meditation provides me with a tool to navigate an inner map to wisdom”; Item 7: “Mindfulness Meditation allows me to understand the truth about myself and others”).

Interpersonal Benevolence and Compassion

This facet reflects the attribution of prosocial efficacy to contemplative practice. It encompasses the conviction that engaging in non-judgmental acceptance of reality intrinsically increases interpersonal empathy, attenuates relational reactivity, and organically deepens human connection (e.g., Item 1: “Mindfulness Meditation makes us much more compassionate”; Item 2: “Accepting reality without judgments has enabled me to develop more meaningful relationships with others”).

Sociopolitical and Utopian Transformation

Extending beyond the perimeter of individual psychopathology, this facet evaluates utopian expectations regarding the societal consequences of widespread mindfulness adoption. It captures beliefs that meditation practice possesses sufficient pacifying force to resolve institutional dysfunction, reduce systemic societal violence, and warrant mandatory institutionalization within state education systems (e.g., Item 4: “If everyone did Mindfulness Meditation, there would be much less violence in the world”; Item 5: “Mindfulness Meditation should be taught as part of the school curricula”).

Subjective Axiological Value

This dimension operationalizes the intrinsic personal value, moral salience, and cognitive priority assigned to the state and trait of being mindful within the individual’s broader lifestyle and identity hierarchy (e.g., Item 8: “Becoming mindful is something I really value in my life”).

6. Theoretical Framework

The conceptual framework underpinning the BPMS integrates principles from cognitive psychology, social psychology of religion, and critical contemplative studies. Specifically, it synthesizes three major theoretical perspectives:

Kirsch’s Response Expectancy Theory

According to Irving Kirsch’s Response Expectancy Theory (1985, 1999), the anticipation of nonvolitional psychological and physiological reactions can directly trigger those very responses. In psychological interventions, expectancy does not merely act as an external motivator; it alters subjective experience via top-down cognitive processing. Within contemplative science, participants who enter an eight-week mindfulness program harboring strong prior beliefs regarding meditation’s pacifying and curative powers are primed to interpret ambiguous emotional states through this confirmation lens. The BPMS provides a psychometrically rigorous metric to capture this pre-existing response expectancy baseline.

The Secularization and Spiritualization of Contemplative Practice

The theoretical architecture of the BPMS is also informed by sociological analyses of contemporary meditation culture, often termed the “McMindfulness” critique (Purser, 2019) and the sociology of secularized spirituality (Farias & Wikholm, 2016). When Buddhist Vipassana and Zen traditions were stripped of their explicit cosmological frameworks to facilitate clinical integration, the underlying soteriological promises—enlightenment, cessation of suffering, universal compassion—were not eliminated. Instead, they were recoded into psychological, biomedical, and scientific vernacular. Mindfulness was re-enchanted as an all-purpose neurocognitive panacea capable of addressing modern alienation, anxiety, and moral discord. The BPMS operationalizes the resulting cognitive schemata: an implicit faith system that attributes transcendental efficacy to a secular behavioral protocol.

Cognitive Dissonance and Self-Enhancement Mechanisms

The theoretical framework incorporates theories of cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) and effort justification. Sustained meditation practice frequently demands tolerance of physical discomfort, boredom, and psychological distress. To resolve the tension between the rigorous demands of daily practice and ambiguous short-term affective gains, practitioners often inflate their cognitive appraisal of the practice’s ultimate value. Consequently, beliefs regarding the power of mindfulness function as psychological protective factors, stabilizing commitment and fostering moral self-licensing.

7. Validity

The initial validation of the BPMS by Rahmani, van Mulukom, and Farias (2023) established evidence for construct, convergent, and discriminant validity across several pre-registered hypotheses.

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity was examined by correlating BPMS scores with behavioral practice metrics, dispositional mindfulness, and subjective spirituality:

• Meditation Experience and Frequency: Consistent with theoretical assumptions, individuals who had engaged in meditation practice across longer cumulative durations ($p < .001$) and those who practiced with higher weekly frequencies ($p < .001$) exhibited significantly higher BPMS scores compared to novices and non-meditators. This demonstrates that belief in the transformative powers of mindfulness is actively reinforced by behavioral immersion in contemplative subcultures.
• Self-Reported Mindfulness Traits: Significant positive correlations were established between the BPMS and standard self-report measures of dispositional mindfulness skills, confirming that individuals who perceive themselves as possessing refined present-moment attention and non-judgmental acceptance also report stronger ideological belief in mindfulness as a transformative force.
• Spirituality vs. Religiosity: A critical convergent finding emerged regarding personal belief orientations. Higher scores on standardized measures of spirituality were significantly and positively correlated with BPMS scores ($p < .01$). Conversely, traditional institutional religiosity exhibited no significant association with the BPMS. This divergence confirms that the BPMS captures modern “spiritual but not religious” cognitive frameworks, wherein meditation functions as an individualized, non-theistic path to ethical insight and self-transcendence.

Demographic and Cross-National Variations

The validation study identified notable systematic demographic variances:

• Cross-National Discrepancies: Participants recruited from the United States demonstrated significantly higher BPMS scores than participants from the United Kingdom ($p < .01$). This aligns with cross-cultural sociological observations indicating that American wellness culture incorporates secularized spirituality and self-optimization discourses more aggressively than British contexts.
• Age Trajectories: Chronological age was positively correlated with BPMS scores; older adult cohorts reported significantly stronger beliefs in the transformative and compassionate powers of mindfulness than younger cohorts, reflecting potential generational differences in health-seeking behaviors and spiritual paradigms.

8. Reliability

The BPMS exhibits high internal consistency reliability across adult populations. In the initial psychometric validation study ($N = 373$), the scale demonstrated identical, robust coefficients across both classic and modern internal consistency estimates:

• Cronbach’s Alpha ($lpha$): $lpha = .89$ ($95% \text{ CI } [.87, .91]$), indicating high interrelatedness among items without excessive redundancy.
• McDonald’s Omega Total ($\omega$): $\omega = .89$, confirming high composite reliability when relaxing the assumption of tau-equivalence (equal factor loadings across items).

Item-total correlations across the 9 items ranged systematically from moderate to strong ($r_{it} = .52$ to $.74$), confirming that every individual item contributed meaningfully to the total scale variance. Inter-item correlations remained consistently within the optimal psychometric target range of $.35$ to $.65$, demonstrating appropriate construct cohesion without narrow item-wording collinearity.

While the initial publication established strong cross-sectional internal consistency, prospective longitudinal investigations are required to formally establish test-retest reliability ($r_{tt}$) across extended temporal windows (e.g., 8 to 12 weeks) and to evaluate measurement invariance across clinical versus non-clinical samples.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the BPMS was evaluated using exploratory factor analytic procedures on the pool of candidates generated from qualitative field studies.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

A Principal Axis Factoring (PAF) procedure was conducted on the 9 items. Inspection of the unrotated factor matrix revealed that the first general factor explained 54.0% of the common variance, yielding an eigenvalue of 4.86. Examination of the associated scree plot displayed an acute, distinct elbow directly following the first factor:

• Factor 1: Eigenvalue = 4.86 (54.0% of common variance).
• Factor 2: Eigenvalue = 0.85 (accounting for only 9.4% of common variance).
• Factor 3: Eigenvalue = 0.61 (accounting for 6.8% of common variance).

Because the eigenvalue for the second factor fell below the Kaiser-Guttman criterion threshold of 1.0, and given the abrupt tapering of the scree plot line, extraction was halted at a single factor. No rotation was computed, confirming a strong, parsimonious unidimensional model representing an overarching construct: generalized belief in the transformative powers of mindfulness.

Factor Loadings

All 9 items demonstrated substantial, positive factor loadings on the latent general factor, ranging between $.58$ and $.81$. Items tapping intrapersonal insight (e.g., “Mindfulness Meditation allows me to understand the truth about myself and others”) and global utopian reform (e.g., “If everyone did Mindfulness Meditation, there would be much less violence in the world”) loaded cohesively onto this single latent dimension, indicating that in everyday conceptual models, individuals do not dissociate personal emotional regulation from broader societal pacification.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Test Name: Belief in the Powers of Mindfulness Scale (BPMS)
• Test Type: Original psychometric rating scale (self-report questionnaire)
• Authors: Masoumeh Rahmani, Valerie van Mulukom, and Miguel Farias (2023)
• Number of Items: 9 statements
• Response Format: Six-point bipolar Likert scale with labeled numeric anchors:
• $-2.5$ = Strongly disagree
• $-1.5$ = Disagree
• $-0.5$ = Somewhat disagree
• $+0.5$ = Somewhat agree
• $+1.5$ = Agree
• $+2.5$ = Strongly agree
• Scoring Procedure: Items are rated with Likert scale response options. Scores across all 9 items are summed or averaged to compute an overall continuous score. Because response options use a zero-centered bipolar structure ($-2.5$ to $+2.5$), a composite mean score above $0$ reflects net positive belief in the powers of mindfulness, whereas a mean score below $0$ reflects net skepticism or rejection. Alternatively, researchers may linearly rescale the response values to a standard 1 to 6 metric ($1 = \text{Strongly disagree}$ to $6 = \text{Strongly agree}$) for integration into classical test theory software pipelines.
• Reverse Scored Items: None. All items are positively keyed.
• Administration Time: Approximately 2 to 3 minutes.
• Administration Method: Electronic survey (computer, tablet, mobile) or paper-and-pencil self-administration.
• Target Population: General adult population (18–73+ years), clinical trial participants entering contemplative interventions, and workplace wellness cohorts.
• Methodological Note on Item 3: The authors note that Item 3 (“Mindfulness Meditation allows me to see the negative aspects of my behavior and to improve my relationship with others”) possesses a double-barreled semantic construction (linking personal behavioral insight with relationship improvement). In research protocols requiring strict psychometric minimalism, investigators may split the item into two distinct prompts or administer the abbreviated clause: “Mindfulness Meditation allows me to see the negative aspects of my behavior.”

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

• Publication Year: 2023
• Copyright: The Authors (Masoumeh Rahmani, Valerie van Mulukom, and Miguel Farias) under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
• Licensing: Open Access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
• Fee: Free of charge for academic, research, teaching, and non-commercial clinical use. No formal written permission is required from the authors or publisher for scholarly implementation, provided appropriate academic attribution is cited.
• Commercial Use: Commercial redistribution, inclusion in proprietary diagnostic software packages, or corporate wellness monetization requires direct permission from the copyright holders.

12. References

• Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191105283504
• Farias, M., & Wikholm, C. (2016). Has the science of mindfulness lost its mind? BJPsych Bulletin, 40(6), 329–332. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.bp.116.053686
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
• Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. Delacorte.
• Kirsch, I. (1985). Response expectancy as a determinant of experience and behavior. American Psychologist, 40(11), 1189–1202. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.40.11.1189
• Kirsch, I. (1999). How expectancies shape experience. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10332-000
• Purser, R. (2019). McMindfulness: How mindfulness became the new capitalist spirituality. Repeater Books.
• Rahmani, M., van Mulukom, V., & Farias, M. (2023). Believing in the powers of mindfulness: A thematic narrative approach and the development of a new scale. Mindfulness, 14(7), 1689–1704. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-023-02164-x

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)