PSY30006 Hypothesis: 1493694

The following null and alternative hypothesis have been formulated and tested.

Null hypothesis

  1. It was hypothesized that higher number of hours spent meditating would not positively correlate with higher scores on the new equanimity
  2. It was hypothesized that the more hours a participant spent meditating, the higher their score on the equanimity scale would be

Alternative hypothesis

  1. It was hypothesized that higher number of hours spent meditating would positively correlate with higher scores on the new equanimity
  2. It was hypothesized that the more hours a participant spent meditating, the higher their score on the equanimity scale would be

Objectives

Generally, an equanimity is known to be an attitude which is non-reactive and has been increasingly recognized as a crucial component of mindfulness practice. In addition, it a significant mechanism of mindfulness-based interventions with inadequate appropriate measurement. Hence, the current study develops a measure of equanimity through the self-report by exploring the underlying factor structure, validity, and reliability to determine whether higher number of hours spent meditating would positively correlate with higher scores on the new equanimity. 

Methods

A total 28 items were selected from existing mindfulness questionnaires with different measures of related constructs to generate a new variable called the Equanimity representing the Equanimity Scale-28 (EQ1- EQ20 and NAS1- NAS8). In addition, these constructs were then reviewed by other researchers thus decisions were based on the majority agreement as per their construct validity opinions were based. Furthermore, the 28 items and other questionnaires were administered through the Qualtrics online platform to help in the assessment of the validity. In total, 241 adults from the general community too part in the survey. To note, the questionnaires were then re-administered to assess test-retest reliability.

Results

Step 1

The results in the table below is a diagnostic test before conducting the Exploratory Factor Analysis. On this note, when the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy is equal or greater than 0.60 as shown in the table below then an Exploratory Factor Analysis can be conducted given that the sample used was adequate. In addition, when the Bartlett’s test of sphericity is significant (p < 0.05), the Exploratory Factor Analysis can be conducted.

KMO and Bartlett’s Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy..842
Bartlett’s Test of SphericityApprox. Chi-Square1215.900
df66
Sig..000


Step 2

In addition, the findings in the table below indicate the Initial Eigenvalues. In this table, the main area to look are only components that have Total Initial Eigenvalues greater than 1. From the results output in the table below, only three components have Total Initial Eigenvalues greater than 1 and that is Meditation, Equanimity Scale-28 and Nonattachment. The implication is that these three components explain 59.198% of the variance. Hence, it is prudent to conclude that there are three factors.

Total Variance Explained
ComponentInitial EigenvaluesExtraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Total% of VarianceCumulative %Total% of VarianceCumulative %
14.64438.70038.7004.64438.70038.700
21.35911.32750.0261.35911.32750.026
31.1019.17259.1981.1019.17259.198
41.0008.33167.528   
5.7876.56274.091   
6.7466.21380.304   
7.6595.49285.796   
8.5434.52990.325   
9.4783.98194.306   
10.3122.60396.909   
11.2772.30699.215   
12.094.785100.000   
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

For the scree plot, it confirms our conclusion where the slope of this curve levels out after just three factors as had been established.

Step 3

The table shows factor weights. The first component is equanimity, nonattachment, mindfulness, decentering, neuroticism, life satisfaction and stress– all negative feelings. The second component is agreeableness and openness – all positive feelings. The third component is meditation, Extraversion and Conscientiousness – all positive feelings. The highlighted indicated factors that loaded most strongly on factors 1, 2 and three.

Component Matrixa
 Component
123
Equanimity Scale-28.924-.020-.067
Mediation.344.270-.578
Nonattachment.832-.099-.131
Mindfulness.645.110-.052
Decentering.848-.046-.113
Extraversion.148-.013.556
Conscientiousness.333.014.595
Agreeableness.279.715.223
Neuroticism-.783.205-.064
Openness.279.782.035
Life Satisfaction.638-.277.082
Stress-.732.148-.062
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
a. 3 components extracted.

Step 4

Table Component Correlation Matrix shows that there is a positive strong correlation between factors (Meditation, Equanimity Scale-28) which is good for our hypothesized analysis.

Component Transformation Matrix
Component123
1.966.246.081
2-.235.964-.122
3-.109.099.989
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.   Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that higher number of hours spent meditating would positively correlate with higher scores on the new equanimity. This implies that the more hours a participant spent meditating, the higher their score on the equanimity scale would be.

Conclusion

Based on the study findings, a higher number of hours spent meditating would positively correlate with higher scores on the new equanimity hence prudent to conclude that the more hours a participant spent meditating, the higher their score on the equanimity scale would be. In addition, the Equanimity Scale-28 appears to be a valid and reliable self-report measure to when it comes to the assessment of the trait equanimity. Thus, it can be further explored in the coming future studies as a main research tool for progress assessment during mindfulness-based interventions, and in one way or the other assisting in the investigation of their underlying mechanisms.