Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Review

Mindfulness, Big Five personality, and affect: A meta-analysis

Tamara L. Giluk *
Department of Management and Organizations, University of Iowa, Henry B. Tippie College of Business, Iowa City, IA 52242, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Mindfulness is purposefully and nonjudgmentally paying attention to the present moment. The primary
Received 16 February 2009 purpose of this study is to provide a more precise empirical estimate of the relationship between mind-
Received in revised form 22 June 2009 fulness and the Big Five personality traits as well as trait affect. Current research results present incon-
Accepted 24 June 2009
sistent or highly variable estimates of these relationships. Meta-analysis was used to synthesize findings
Available online 31 July 2009
from 32 samples in 29 studies. Results indicate that, although all of the traits display appreciable relation-
ships with mindfulness, the strongest relationships are found with neuroticism, negative affect, and con-
Keywords:
scientiousness. Conscientiousness, in particular, is often ignored by mindfulness researchers; results here
Mindfulness
Personality
indicate it deserves stronger consideration. Although the results provide a clearer picture of how mind-
Affect fulness relates to these traits, they also highlight the need to ensure an appropriate conceptualization and
measurement of mindfulness.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction draw conclusions regarding the relationship of mindfulness to per-

sonality and trait affect because research results have been incon-
Mindfulness is a quality of consciousness, more specifically sistent. For example, research has shown extraversion to be both
defined as ‘‘paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in positively (e.g., Baer, Smith, & Allen, 2004) and negatively (e.g.,
the present moment, nonjudgmentally” (Kabat-Zinn, 1994, p. 4). Thompson & Waltz, 2007; Waters, 2007) related to mindfulness.
Mindfulness consists of a purposeful attention to and awareness Neuroticism has consistently been shown to relate negatively to
of the present moment, approached with an attitude of openness, mindfulness, however, correlations have ranged from as low as
acceptance, and nonjudgment (Bishop et al., 2004; Kabat-Zinn, .28 (Bartlett & Plaut, 2009; O’Loughlin & Zuckerman, 2008) to
1990; Kabat-Zinn, 1994). Research on mindfulness has increased as high as .58 (Kostanski, 2007) with estimates spanning this en-
dramatically (Brown, Ryan, & Creswell, 2007) and appears to be tire range; thus, it is difficult to precisely estimate the magnitude
warranted. Mindfulness has been shown to have positive effects of the relationship. Results for the remaining Big Five personality
on mental health and psychological well-being (e.g., depression, traits and for trait affect show similar variability.
anxiety), physical health (e.g., chronic pain), and quality of Meta-analysis (Hunter & Schmidt, 2004) is an analytical tool to
intimate relationships (Baer, 2003; Brown & Ryan, 2003; Brown synthesize results across studies. By cumulating results across
et al., 2007; Grossman, Niemann, Schmidt, & Walach, 2004). individual studies, meta-analysis corrects for the biasing effects
Mindfulness can also reduce stress and burnout in the workplace of sampling error. Meta-analytic methods can also address the
(e.g., Mackenzie, Poulin, & Seidman-Carlson, 2006) and may have biasing effects of other statistical artifacts such as measurement
broader effects such as more external awareness at work, more error. Thus, meta-analysis often can resolve the issue of such seem-
positive relationships at work, and increased adaptability (Hunter ingly inconsistent results. It provides the most precise and accurate
& McCormick, 2008). estimate possible given the available data regarding a particular
Measurement of the mindfulness construct has begun only in relationship.
the last decade. To examine validity of a construct, researchers at- Therefore, in this paper I seek to contribute to the developing
tempt to discern its nomological net; that is, to make clear what understanding of the mindfulness construct by calculating a more
something is, often by relating the theoretical construct to other precise and accurate estimate of the observed and construct-level
constructs (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955). Thus, scholars have exam- relationships between mindfulness and the Big Five personality
ined mindfulness in relation to established and well-understood traits as well as trait affect. I begin by discussing mindfulness,
dispositional constructs such as the Big Five personality traits the Big Five, and trait affect. I then present meta-analytic results
and trait positive and negative affect. However, it is difficult to of the relationship of mindfulness to personality and trait affect. I
conclude with a discussion of the findings as well as implications
* Tel.: +1 319 335 1504; fax: +1 319 335 1956. for the mindfulness construct and future research.
E-mail address: tamara-giluk@uiowa.edu

0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.06.026
806 T.L. Giluk / Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811

2. What is mindfulness? than others (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Thus, neuroticism has been
negatively linked to subjective well-being (e.g., Diener, Suh, Lucas,
Mindfulness is paying attention to the present moment on pur- & Smith, 1999). Mindfulness, on the other hand, has been associ-
pose and without judgment (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). This view of mind- ated with enhanced self-regulated functioning, mental health,
fulness has its roots in Buddhism (Kabat-Zinn, 1994) and is and psychological well-being (Brown et al., 2007). Through a pro-
characterized as an Eastern perspective on mindfulness (Weick & cess of voluntary exposure (i.e., ‘‘sitting with” one’s experiences,
Putnam, 2006; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2006). Mindfulness entails self- even those which are unpleasant, rather than avoiding them),
regulation of attention to concentrate on the present (Bishop mindful individuals are thought to have a greater ability to tolerate
et al., 2004). Thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensations are consid- a range of thoughts, emotions, and experiences (Baer, 2003; Brown
ered to be objects which one should observe but not something et al., 2007; Shapiro, Carlson, Astin, & Freedman, 2006). Therefore,
on which one should elaborate (i.e., direct attention toward thinking mindfulness is expected to be negatively related to neuroticism.
about the thought, feeling, or sensation). Such elaboration would
take one out of the present moment and require use of resources 3.2. Extraversion
that could be devoted to present-moment awareness. In addition,
elaboration often involves judgment (e.g., this is a ‘‘good” or ‘‘bad” Extraverts tend to be talkative, social, gregarious, and assertive
experience because of how it is making me think or feel). Mindful (Barrick et al., 2001). Both extraversion (e.g., Diener et al., 1999)
awareness emphasizes impartiality so as to minimize habitual reac- and mindfulness (Brown et al., 2007) have been linked to subjec-
tions and encourage thoughtful response (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). tive well-being and positive emotionality, which would suggest
Mindfulness also involves one’s orientation to experience that these constructs are positively related. However, extraversion
(Bishop et al., 2004). Mindfulness encourages approaching one’s is also characterized by a need for activity, excitement, and stimu-
experiences with a ‘‘beginner’s mind” (Kabat-Zinn, 1990, pp. 35– lation (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Such a need may make mindfulness
36), as if experiencing the event for the first time. With such an ap- of the present moment, particularly if the present moment is rou-
proach, one brings to their experience openness and acceptance tine or slow-paced, difficult for extraverts. This difficulty suggests a
(Bishop et al., 2004). Acceptance in this sense refers to receptivity potential negative relationship with mindfulness. Thus, the pro-
to seeing things as they actually are in the present moment (Kabat- posed relationship between mindfulness and extraversion is un-
Zinn, 1990). Each moment is viewed as unique, and if one brings to clear. Previous research has found extraversion to be both
the moment preconceived ideas, one will not be able to experience positively (e.g., Baer et al., 2004) and negatively (e.g., Thompson
the moment as it truly is. Non-attachment, or the attitude of letting & Waltz, 2007; Waters, 2007) related to mindfulness. Thus, no
go, is fundamental to this orientation. One learns to attend to and hypothesis is made regarding the relationship.
accept all experiences, which allows an individual to respond effec-
tively rather than react habitually to the experience (Bishop et al., 3.3. Openness to experience
2004; Kabat-Zinn, 1990).
This meta-analysis and the above discussion focus on the East- Individuals who score highly on openness to experience tend to
ern perspective on mindfulness. The Western perspective of mind- be curious, imaginative, broad-minded, and unconventional (Bar-
fulness is rooted in an information-processing perspective (Weick rick et al., 2001). Openness to experience implies receptivity to
& Sutcliffe, 2006) and is best exemplified by the work of Harvard experience, including one’s own inner feelings and emotions. Open
psychologist Ellen Langer (e.g., 1989). Langer’s conceptualization individuals are attentive to and curious about both their inner and
of mindfulness shares some commonalities with the Eastern per- outer worlds (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Mindfulness emphasizes
spective; however, there are conceptual differences (Weick & Put- attention to and awareness of one’s experiences as well as an ap-
nam, 2006; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2006). Langer’s mindfulness focuses proach to these experiences that is curious, open, and accepting
on the process of making novel distinctions and taking different (Bishop et al., 2004; Kabat-Zinn, 1994). The common elements of
perspectives as opposed to relying on categories created in the past attention, curiosity, and receptivity suggest that mindfulness
or a single viewpoint (Langer, 1989). Langer (1989) cautions should be positively related to openness to experience.
against making strict comparisons between her work within the
Western scientific perspective and mindfulness derived from an 3.4. Agreeableness
Eastern tradition.
Agreeable people are generally good-natured, cooperative, sup-
3. Relationships of mindfulness with personality and trait affect portive, caring and concerned for others (Barrick et al., 2001). Mind-
fulness is also characterized by showing feelings of empathy and
The five-factor (Big Five) model of personality, which has be- compassion toward others and toward one’s relationships (Kabat-
come well-established in recent decades, consists of the traits neu- Zinn, 1990). In addition, agreeable individuals are generally trusting
roticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and and believe that others are honest and well-intentioned (Costa &
conscientiousness (Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001). Positive and McCrae, 1992). This belief seems consistent with the mindful orien-
negative affect are the two dominant dimensions that consistently tation of ‘‘beginner’s mind” (Kabat-Zinn, 1990, pp. 35–36), in which
emerge in studies of affect, the broad term encompassing emotions people and events are approached as if experiencing them for the
and moods. Research results indicate a strong dispositional compo- first time. Thus, mindful individuals are likely to approach a person
nent of affect, such that even transitory moods are a reflection of with whom they have had negative interactions in the past (e.g.,
one’s general affective level (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). I interactions that may lead to distrust) with an orientation of start-
next briefly discuss how mindfulness is expected to relate to each ing anew with a sense of trust in the individual’s intentions. Thus,
of the Big Five personality traits as well as trait affect. mindfulness is expected to positively relate to agreeableness.

3.1. Neuroticism 3.5. Conscientiousness

Neurotic individuals tend to be anxious, self-conscious, moody, Conscientious individuals are likely to be dependable, responsi-
and insecure (Barrick et al., 2001). They are more susceptible to ble, rule abiding, and achievement-oriented (Barrick et al., 2001).
psychological distress and generally cope more poorly with stress One hallmark of conscientiousness is self-discipline (Costa & Mc-
 T.L. Giluk / Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811 807

Crae, 1992). Similarly, mindfulness researchers theorize that the Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), Philadelphia Mind-
beneficial effects of mindfulness can be explained by mindful fulness Scale (PMS), Big Five Inventory (BFI), Revised NEO Person-
individuals’ greater ability to self-regulate (e.g., Masicampo & ality Inventory (NEO-PR-R), NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI),
Baumeister, 2007; Shapiro et al., 2006). Both mindfulness and and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). This search
conscientiousness also are characterized by deliberateness and resulted in 163 articles identified for consideration. This search
responding effectively rather than reacting impulsively or habitu- was supplemented with reference lists from reviews of mindful-
ally (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Kabat-Zinn, 1990). In addition, both ness (e.g., Brown et al., 2007), from all articles identified for inclu-
mindfulness and conscientiousness, particularly the competence sion, and with Google Scholar.
facet of conscientiousness, have been positively linked with
self-esteem (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Costa & McCrae, 1992). For 4.2. Inclusion criteria
these reasons, I expect mindfulness to positively relate to
conscientiousness. Each potentially relevant article was reviewed against the inclu-
sion criteria. To qualify for inclusion, a study must have included
3.6. Positive affect (1) a measure of mindfulness in general experience based on the
Eastern perspective, (2) a measure of at least one of the Big Five
Trait positive affect generally corresponds to the personality personality traits, trait positive affect, or trait negative affect, (3)
factor of extraversion. High positive affect is described as a state all measures collected from an adult population, and (4) the
of full concentration, one in which individuals are alert, energetic, zero-order correlation or the necessary data to calculate the
and engaged (Watson et al., 1988). Such a description seems con- zero-order correlation between mindfulness and at least one of
sistent with features inherent to mindfulness, such as one’s full these variables.
concentration on the present moment and engagement with pres- Studies that consisted of a mindfulness-based training interven-
ent experience (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). In addition, mindfulness has tion (e.g., Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction, Kabat-Zinn, 1990)
been shown to positively correlate with individuals’ reports of were included only if the mindfulness and personality/affect con-
the extent to which they feel energized and vital (Brown & Ryan, structs were measured pre-intervention, as the primary interest
2003). Both positive affect and extraversion share a tendency to- of this meta-analysis is the relationship between mindfulness
ward positive emotionality, energy, and activity. However, positive and the personality/affect variables rather than the effect of a
affect does not share the emphasis on excitement and sensation- mindfulness training intervention on mindfulness or on its rela-
seeking that is inherent in extraversion (Costa & McCrae, 1992) tionship with these variables. Studies were excluded if they did
and that may suggest a potential negative relationship with mind- not provide the appropriate data. Authors of studies that measured
fulness. Thus, I expect a positive correlation between mindfulness the variables of interest but did not report the needed data were
and positive affect. contacted via e-mail if they could be located. Studies of non-
respondent authors were excluded. Studies were also excluded if
3.7. Negative affect they employed the Western perspective of mindfulness (i.e., use
of the Langer Mindfulness Scale; Langer, 2004) or measured mind-
Trait negative affect reflects the extent to which someone feels a fulness in response to a specific meditation experience rather than
variety of unpleasurable moods, such as distress, nervousness, guilt, everyday mindfulness (e.g., Toronto Mindfulness Scale; Lau et al.,
or anger, and is highly correlated with the personality trait neurot- 2006). Note also that one study meeting the inclusion criteria in-
icism (Watson et al., 1988). Thus, like neurotic individuals, high cluded multiple independent samples (Brown & Ryan, 2003).
negative-affect individuals are more likely to experience psycho- Overall, 29 studies (23 published studies, 4 dissertations/theses,
logical distress and negative emotions and mood states (Watson 1 conference presentation, and 1 working paper), which included
& Clark, 1984). In contrast to mindful individuals, who are thought 32 independent samples, met the inclusion criteria. These studies
to have a greater ability to tolerate a range of thoughts, emotions, yielded between 7 and 18 correlations of the mindfulness con-
and experiences (Baer, 2003; Brown et al., 2007; Shapiro et al., struct and one of the seven individual difference variables. Studies
2006), individuals high in negative affect exhibit psychological dis- included in the meta-analysis are marked with an asterisk in the
comfort or distress even in the absence of any obvious external reference section.
stressor (Watson & Clark, 1984). In addition, those high in negative
affect tend to dwell upon mistakes and frustrations (Watson & 4.3. Coding
Clark, 1984). Such rumination is inconsistent with the present-mo-
ment focus inherent in mindfulness. This analysis suggests that Each study was coded for the correlations involving mindful-
mindfulness will correlate negatively with negative affect. ness and one of the personality or trait affect variables, the mea-
sures used for each of the variables, the reliabilities of these
4. Method measures, and the sample.

4.1. Literature search 4.3.1. Composite calculation

In several studies, multiple measures of mindfulness were in-
I first conducted a computer-based literature search using the cluded for a single sample. Other studies reported correlations only
ABI/INFORM, PsycINFO, and ScienceDirect databases to identify with subscales of mindfulness scales. In both types of cases, I cal-
studies that referenced mindfulness, personality, and trait affect. culated a composite correlation between the multiple measures
I searched using the following keywords, including the names or subscales and the given individual difference variable using
and acronyms of scales commonly used to measure these con- the methods described in Hunter and Schmidt (2004) and Nunnally
structs: mindfulness, personality, Big Five, extraversion, neuroti- and Bernstein (1994). I used the scale or subscale intercorrelations
cism, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness, given in the study to compute the composites. If these data were
openness to experience, positive affect, negative affect, Mindful- not given in the study, then I used estimates from the literature
ness Attention and Awareness Scale (MAAS), Kentucky Inventory (e.g., scale validation papers). Thus, one correlation for mindfulness
of Mindfulness Skills (KIMS), Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory and each of the individual difference variables measured in the
(FMI), Cognitive and Affect Mindfulness Scale—Revised (CAMS-R), study was included in the overall analysis.
808 T.L. Giluk / Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811

4.3.2. Reliability standard deviation of the true score correlation (SDq), the 80% cred-
This meta-analysis corrects for attenuation due to measure- ibility interval, and the 95% confidence interval. Neuroticism
ment error. Where reliability information (e.g., alpha coefficients) (q = .58; SDq = .12) was the strongest correlate of mindfulness, fol-
was included in the studies, I used this value to correct for mea- lowed closely by negative affect (q = .51; SDq = .07), conscientious-
surement error. As is generally the case, many studies did not re- ness (q = .44; SDq = .10), and positive affect (q = .41; SDq = .08).
port reliability of the measures used; in these cases, I used Confidence and credibility intervals excluded zero for all traits.
appropriate mean reliabilities. The six studies that did not report Although not reported in Table 1, results also show that the per-
reliability on mindfulness used the MAAS. Therefore, the reliability centage of variability in the correlations across studies that was ex-
of the MAAS for these studies was recorded as the average reliabil- plained by sampling error and other statistical artifacts spans a
ity calculated from the 13 studies that did report reliabilities for wide range (21–98%). For openness to experience, a large percent-
this measure (mean a = .85). For positive and negative affect, I used age of the variability (98%) was explained by sampling error and
reliability estimates from a recent meta-analysis conducted with other statistical artifacts and this is reflected in its narrow credibil-
these traits (Thoresen, Kaplan, Barsky, Warren, & de Chermont, ity intervals. It is likely that artifacts unable to be corrected for
2003). I used the average reliability for samples included in the (e.g., data errors) account for the unexplained variance (i.e., the
meta-analysis of one criterion, job satisfaction. This average is ‘‘75% rule;” Hunter & Schmidt, 2004). For other traits, only a small
based on 54 reported reliabilities for trait positive affect (mean percentage of the variability was explained by these artifacts (e.g.,
a = .80) and 123 reported reliabilities for trait negative affect agreeableness, 21%; neuroticism, 28%) and credibility intervals are
(mean a = .82). For the Big Five personality traits, I referred to wider. Wide credibility intervals may suggest the potential pres-
mean reliability estimates for these traits gathered from multiple ence of moderator variables. Additionally, because mean reliabili-
meta-analyses with minimal overlap by Schmidt, Shaffer, and Oh ties were used in such a large proportion of the studies, there
(2008). I used the average of the mean reliabilities they provided was less variation in reliability estimates. To the extent that this
for each personality trait and job performance criteria. Thus, in this variation differs from the actual variation of reliabilities, the per-
meta-analysis, the mean reliability used for those studies that did cent variance accounted for by artifacts is underestimated.
not report the information was as follows: .80 for neuroticism, .79
for extraversion, .79 for openness to experience, .78 for agreeable- 6. Discussion
ness, and .79 for conscientiousness. The reliability estimates above
are internal consistency reliability estimates. These reliability esti- Results of this meta-analysis suggest that the established and
mates do not correct for transient error and, therefore, results may well-studied five-factor model of personality and trait affect can
be biased downward. help researchers to better understand the mindfulness construct
on which research is just beginning. Specifically, neuroticism dis-
4.4. Data analysis played a large correlation with mindfulness, while negative affect,
conscientiousness, and positive affect displayed moderate correla-
I conducted the meta-analysis employing Hunter and Schmidt’s tions with mindfulness.
(2004) meta-analytic procedures, which assume a random-effects Neuroticism is the Big Five personality trait which has been
model. Correlations were corrected individually. To describe the most often investigated with respect to mindfulness and appar-
variability in the estimates, I report both 95% confidence intervals ently for good reason; it was the strongest correlate of mindful-
and 80% credibility values around the estimated population corre- ness. Neuroticism was followed closely by trait negative affect,
lations. Confidence intervals estimate variability in the mean cor- which is highly correlated with neuroticism (Watson et al.,
relation; they capture the precision of the estimate of the mean 1988). Such a result was expected, as each individual study involv-
and are based on sampling error. Credibility intervals refer to the ing these variables had found a moderate to large negative correla-
distribution of parameter values and estimate variability in the tion with mindfulness. In addition, the portraits of a neurotic or
individual correlations across studies; they are biased by any high negative-affect individual and a mindful individual are largely
remaining effects for which corrections were not made. A modera- a study in contrasts. The neurotic or high negative-affect individual
tor analysis (e.g., based on the specific mindfulness scale used) was is more susceptible to psychological distress and less likely to dem-
not yet feasible due to the small number of studies. onstrate psychological well-being (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Diener
et al., 1999; Watson & Clark, 1984) while the mindful individual
5. Results is less susceptible to psychological distress and more likely to be
psychologically well-adjusted (Brown et al., 2007). However, as
Meta-analytic results are reported in Table 1 as follows: number Brown and Ryan (2003) point out and Thompson and Waltz
of samples (k), total sample size (N), sample-size weighted mean ob- (2007) echo, it is not clear whether ‘‘being mindful may lower neu-
served correlation (mean r), sample-size weighted standard devia- rotic tendencies, or neuroticism may interfere with mindfulness”
tion of observed correlation (SDr), mean true score correlation (q), (p. 1833).

Table 1
Meta-analysis of the relationship of mindfulness to personality and trait affect.

Trait Average 80% CV 95% CI

k N r SDr q SDq Lower Upper Lower Upper
Neuroticism 18 3,309 .45 .11 .58 .12 .73 .42 .65 .51
Extraversion 11 1,674 .12 .10 .15 .09 .03 .27 .08 .22
Openness to Experience 12 1,993 .15 .07 .20 .01 .18 .22 .15 .25
Agreeableness 10 1,374 .22 .18 .30 .22 .03 .58 .15 .45
Conscientiousness 7 895 .32 .10 .44 .10 .31 .57 .34 .54
Positive Affect 15 2,407 .34 .10 .41 .08 .30 .52 .35 .47
Negative Affect 15 2,154 .39 .11 .51 .07 .59 .42 .58 .44

Note: k = number of correlations; N = combined sample size; r = sample-size weighted mean observed correlation; SDr = sample-size weighted standard deviation of observed
correlation; q = estimated mean true score correlation; SDq = standard deviation of true score correlation; CV = credibility interval; CI = confidence interval.
 T.L. Giluk / Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811 809

Conscientiousness displayed a strong, positive relationship with acceptance and nonjudgment dimensions of mindfulness, and their
mindfulness that is larger than one might expect. This result relationship with these particular facets, are what are driving the
should be of interest to researchers. Of the Big Five personality overall relationship between the constructs. The nonjudgmental
traits, conscientiousness is the least likely to be investigated and/ quality of mindfulness leads to equanimity, which contrasts with
or reported with respect to mindfulness (as indicated by a k of 7 these facets of neuroticism, because emotional disturbance often
as compared to a k of 10–18 for the other Big Five traits). Although comes from our interpretation of the event rather than the event
the traits share commonalities in their focus on self-discipline and itself (McCormick, 2006). The same strong, negative relationship
self-regulation (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Masicampo & Baumeister, may not exist when considering the mindfulness dimensions of
2007; Shapiro et al., 2006) as well as thoughtful and deliberate re- attention and awareness. Indeed, Kohls, Sauer, and Walach
sponse (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Kabat-Zinn, 1990), the lack of (2009) recently examined mindfulness factors of acceptance and
investigation and/or reporting with respect to conscientiousness presence in relation to anxiety and depression, and found that
suggests that researchers may not see a natural theoretical rela- the negative relationship between mindfulness and these condi-
tionship with mindfulness as they do with neuroticism/negative tions was completely due to the acceptance factor.
affect and mindfulness. However, this effect size suggests that fur- This meta-analysis revealed a strong, positive correlation of
ther study of the conscientiousness–mindfulness relationship is conscientiousness with mindfulness. At the facet-level, conscien-
warranted. This may be particularly important as mindfulness re- tiousness consists of competence, order, dutifulness, achieve-
search begins to focus on the workplace. Of the Big Five, conscien- ment-striving, self-discipline, and deliberation (Costa & McCrae,
tiousness is one of the strongest predictors of a variety of work 1992). Self-discipline may be more strongly related to a present-fo-
outcomes, including job performance in all jobs, training perfor- cus attention dimension of mindfulness, which requires great self-
mance (Barrick et al., 2001), and counterproductive work behavior regulation, than to an acceptance dimension. Deliberation, the ten-
(Berry, Ones, & Sackett, 2007). dency to think carefully before acting, likely aligns most closely
As one would expect given the moderate, negative relationship with nonjudgment and nonreactivity dimensions, which encour-
of negative affect with mindfulness, positive affect was shown to age the same. However, the order facet, emphasizing neatness
have a moderate, positive relationship. Both high positive affect and tidiness, does not seem to relate to any mindfulness dimension
and mindful individuals more often exist in a state of full concen- in particular. As research in mindfulness progresses, scholars are
tration and engagement and feel energized by their experiences encouraged to explore mindfulness dimensions and the Big Five
(Kabat-Zinn, 1990; Watson et al., 1988). Although positive affect at the facet-level.
corresponds roughly with extraversion (Watson et al., 1988), extra- As was briefly mentioned with respect to neuroticism, one of
version was a much weaker correlate with mindfulness. This may the questions posed by researchers is whether ‘‘everyday mindful-
be due to the fact that extraversion has components such as excite- ness may shape personality or personality may shape everyday
ment and sensation-seeking (Costa & McCrae, 1992) that are not mindfulness or whether both are shaped by other factors” (Thomp-
part of mindfulness. son & Waltz, 2007, p. 1876). As scholars continue to learn more
The relationship of mindfulness with agreeableness was moder- about mindfulness, this will be an important issue to explore. To
ate and positive. Features of agreeableness, such as empathy and a be able to answer such a question, however, researchers need to
concern for others, are consistent with the Buddhist virtues that ensure that they are adequately measuring a general construct
characterize mindfulness (Thompson & Waltz, 2007). SDq for this called ‘‘mindfulness.”
relationship was quite large. Of the 10 agreeableness correlations, Multiple measures of everyday mindfulness from the Eastern
two were negative. One of these ( .33; Heidenreich, Ströhle, & perspective have been recently developed and published and dis-
Michalak, 2006) may be an outlier, yet extreme values can also oc- play moderate to large positive correlations with one another
cur simply due to large sampling errors (Hunter & Schmidt, 2004) (Baer, Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer, & Toney, 2006). Two of these
so this value was not eliminated, particularly as it came from a scales, the KIMS and the FFMQ, were developed by Baer and col-
small-sample study. leagues (Baer et al., 2004, 2006, 2008). The KIMS consists of four
Lastly, as expected, openness to experience was positively re- scales (Observe, Describe, Act/Aware, and Accept without Judg-
lated to mindfulness, though it exhibited a small correlation with ment) and the FFMQ consists of five facets (Observe, Describe,
it. Both traits emphasize attention, curiosity, and receptivity Act/Aware, Nonjudge, and Nonreact). Several intercorrelations
(Bishop et al., 2004; Costa & McCrae, 1992) and these shared ele- among the subscales are low (e.g., Observe with Act/Aware; Baer
ments may account for the results. Openness to experience was et al., 2004; Baer et al., 2006) or negative (e.g., Observe with Accept
the second-most investigated trait with respect to mindfulness, without Judgment and Observe with Nonjudge; Baer et al., 2004;
yet had one of the weaker relationships with it. Unlike with consci- Baer et al., 2006). In this meta-analysis, this resulted in low com-
entiousness, researchers seem to see a natural theoretical fit be- posite reliability estimates (e.g., .39–.59) for mindfulness measured
tween mindfulness and openness to experience and thus, tend to using these scales.
include this trait in their analyses. Yet the results clearly indicate In general, low intercorrelations indicate two possibilities. First,
that mindfulness is more closely associated with conscientiousness the scales may be weak indicators of the general construct mind-
as compared to openness to experience. fulness (indeed, the loading of the Observe factor of the FFMQ on
The preceding discussion focuses on overall mindfulness and the broad mindfulness construct is only .34; the other four facets
each Big Five trait. However, many researchers consider mindful- have loadings of .55, .57, .71, and .72; Baer et al., 2006). Second,
ness to consist of multiple dimensions (e.g., attention, awareness, it may be researchers need to reconsider the way mindfulness is
acceptance, nonjudgment, nonreactivity, etc.) and each Big Five conceptualized. Mindfulness has been viewed as encompassing
personality trait can also be considered at the facet-level. Because skills that can be learned and developed through instruction and
mindfulness research is in the early stages, there was not yet data practice (Bishop et al., 2004), as evidenced by the numerous pro-
available to examine mindfulness and the Big Five at the facet-le- grams that exist to train individuals in mindfulness meditation
vel. As a reviewer pointed out, it may be that this is where the most and a mindful approach to living (e.g., Mindfulness-Based Stress
interesting relationships will be found. Reduction, Kabat-Zinn, 1990). However, mindfulness is also con-
For example, mindfulness is highly negatively correlated with sidered to be dispositional (i.e., conceptualized as a trait such that
neuroticism, which consists of such facets as anxiety, angry hostil- some people are naturally more mindful than others) as well as
ity, and depression (Costa & McCrae, 1992). It may be that the more state-like (i.e., one is mindful as long as the appropriate reg-
810 T.L. Giluk / Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811

ulation of attention and orientation to experience is maintained. fulness may also benefit work outcomes (Hunter & McCormick,
When this practice ceases, then one is no longer mindful in that 2008), scholars are encouraged to continue to understand the mind-
moment; Bishop et al., 2004). Being momentarily mindful is more fulness construct and how best to conceptualize and measure it.
likely among those who have the disposition (Brown & Ryan,
2003). Baer and colleagues (2004) note the negative intercorrela-
tion between the Observe and Accept without Judgment scales of References
the KIMS and conclude that those with limited meditation experi-
References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the
ence can attend to experiences but tend to be judgmental of them.
meta-analysis
Accordingly, in a later examination of the FFMQ (which had shown
similar intercorrelations as those of the KIMS) in a sample of expe- Avey, J. B., Wernsing, T. S., & Luthans, F. (2008). Can positive employees help
rienced meditators, factor intercorrelations were positive and positive organizational change? Impact of psychological capital and emotions
much stronger (Baer et al., 2008). However, the fact that intercor- on relevant attitudes and behaviors. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44,
48–70.
relations differ based on the amount of experience and practice in
Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and
the sample raises the question as to whether mindfulness is more empirical review. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 125–143.
accurately conceptualized as a composite of skills that can be Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-
learned and developed through practice rather than a trait. Clearly, report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment, 11, 191–206.
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-
there is much to be learned about the appropriate conceptualiza- report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13,
tion and measurement of mindfulness. Although this meta-analy- 27–45.
sis cannot resolve the question of whether mindfulness is viewed Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., et al. (2008).
Construct validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in meditating
most appropriately as a set of skills or a trait, knowing how the and nonmeditating samples. Assessment, 15, 329–342.
mindfulness construct relates to well-established traits provides Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at
additional information that may help researchers to better under- the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go
next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9–30.
stand how it should best be conceptualized. Bartlett, R. P., III., & Plaut, V. C. (2009). Blind consent? A social psychological
Although the results provide the most precise estimate of the investigation of non-readership of click-through agreements. University of
relationship of mindfulness with personality and trait affect, the Georgia, Athens, GA (unpublished manuscript).
Berry, C. M., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance,
study has limitations. First, the meta-analytic results are based organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-
on the small number of studies that examined these relationships, analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 410–424.
particularly for conscientiousness. This small number is under- Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., et al.
(2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology:
standable given the recency of this research domain. If researchers
Science and Practice, 11, 230–241.
were to include full correlation matrices in dissertations and pub- Borynski, M. L. (2007). Clarifying the construct of mindfulness and its relationship
lished studies, then the size of this and other meta-analyses could to neuroticism. Doctoral dissertation, Central Michigan University. Dissertation
be increased. Regardless, a meta-analysis of even a few studies pro- Abstracts International, 67 (10-B), 6046.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and
vides a more precise estimate of a relationship than any individual its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
primary study. However, because the number of studies is small, 84, 822–848.
the standard deviation estimate is less accurate than it would be Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical
foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychological Inquiry, 18,
given a large number of studies (i.e., second-order sampling error; 211–237.
Hunter & Schmidt, 2004). Second, because most studies failed to Costa, P.T., Jr., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R)
report reliability estimates for the measures of the variables exam- and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
ined, mean reliability estimates were used in these cases. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests.
Researchers are encouraged to report the needed artifact informa- Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.
tion. Third, I was not able to examine moderators. Because the Daly, M., Delaney, L., & Harmon, C. P. (2009). Psychological and biological
foundations of time preference. Journal of the European Economic Association,
development of scales to measure mindfulness is recent, it would 7, 659–669.
have been insightful to examine if the different scales produced Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three
correlations of different magnitude. However, the number of stud- decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.
Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based
ies employing the various scales is not yet sufficient for such an
stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic
analysis. Research, 57, 35–43.
Heidenreich, T., Ströhle, G., & Michalak, J. (2006). Achtsamkeit: Konzeptuelle
7. Conclusion aspekte und ergebnisse zum Freiburger Achtsamkeitsfragebogen (Mindfulness:
Conceptual aspects and results of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory).
Verhaltenstherapie, 16, 33–40.
In this study, I used meta-analysis to provide a more precise Hunter, J., & McCormick, D. W. (2008). Mindfulness in the workplace: An
estimate of the relationship between mindfulness and the Big Five exploratory study. In S.E. Newell (Facilitator), Weickian Ideas. Symposium
conducted at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.
personality traits as well as trait affect. Results of the current quan- Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and
titative review indicate that, while all of the traits display apprecia- bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ble relationships with mindfulness, the strongest relationships are Jimenez, S. (2008). The role of self-acceptance, negative mood regulation, and
ruminative brooding on mindfulness and depressive symptoms: A longitudinal,
found with neuroticism, conscientiousness, and negative affect. randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation vs. relaxation training.
Conscientiousness, in particular, is often ignored by mindfulness Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Dissertation Abstracts
researchers; results here indicate it deserves stronger consider- International-B, 69/08.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind
ation. Although the results provide a clearer picture of how mind- to face stress, pain and illness. New York: Delacorte.
fulness relates to these traits, they also highlight the need to Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994). Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in
ensure an appropriate conceptualization and adequate measure- everyday life. New York: Hyperion.
Kohls, N., Sauer, S., & Walach, H. (2009). Facets of mindfulness—Results of an online
ment of mindfulness. In addition, investigation of mindfulness
study investigating the Freiburg mindfulness inventory. Personality and
and these traits at the facet-level is encouraged. Given the evidence Individual Differences, 46, 224–230.
that mindfulness has positive effects on mental health and psycho- Kostanski, M. (2007). The role of mindfulness in reducing stress for pre-service
logical well-being, physical health, and quality of intimate relation- students. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association
for Research in Education, Fremantle.
ships (Baer, 2003; Brown & Ryan, 2003; Brown et al., 2007; Kraus, S., & Sears, S. (2009). Measuring the immeasurables: Development and
Grossman et al., 2004) and the recent evidence showing that mind- initial validation of the Self-Other Four Immeasurables (SOFI) scale based on
 T.L. Giluk / Personality and Individual Differences 47 (2009) 805–811 811

Buddhist teachings on loving kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity. Social Shapiro, S. L., Brown, K. B., & Biegel, G. M. (2007). Teaching self-care to caregivers:
Indicators Research, 92, 169–181. Effects of a mindfulness-based stress reduction on the mental health of
Kreitzer, M. J., Gross, C. R., Waleekhachonloet, O., Reilly-Spong, M., & Byrd, M. therapists in training. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 1,
(2009). The Brief Serenity Scale: A psychometric analysis of a measure of 105–115.
spirituality and well-being. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 27, 7–16. Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of
Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press. mindfulness. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 373–386.
Langer, E. J. (2004). Langer Mindfulness Scale User Guide and Technical Manual. Smith, B. W., Shelley, B. M., Dalen, J., Wiggins, K., Tooley, E., & Bernard, J. (2008). A
Worthington, OH: IDS Publishing Corporation. pilot study comparing the effects of mindfulness-based and cognitive-
Lau, M. A., Bishop, S. R., Segal, Z. V., Buis, T., Anderson, N. D., Carlson, L., et al. (2006). behavioral stress reduction. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary
The Toronto Mindfulness Scale: Development and validation. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14, 251–258.
Psychology, 62, 1445–1467. Thompson, B. L., & Waltz, J. (2007). Everyday mindfulness and mindfulness
Mackenzie, C. S., Poulin, P. A., & Seidman-Carlson, R. (2006). A brief mindfulness- meditation: Overlapping constructs or not? Personality and Individual
based stress reduction intervention for nurses and nurse aides. Applied Nursing Differences, 43, 1875–1885.
Research, 19, 105–109. Thoresen, C. J., Kaplan, S. A., Barsky, A. P., Warren, C. R., & de Chermont, K. (2003).
Masicampo, E. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2007). Relating mindfulness and self- The affective underpinnings of job perceptions and attitudes: A meta-analytic
regulatory processes. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 255–258. review and integration. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 914–945.
May, S., & O’Donovan, A. (2007). The advantages of the mindful therapist. Vujanovic, A. A., Youngwirth, N. E., Johnson, K. A., & Zvolensky, M. J. (2009).
Psychotherapy in Australia, 13, 46–53. Mindfulness-based acceptance and posttraumatic stress symptoms among
McCormick, D. W. (2006). A theory of work meditation: Mindfulness on the job. Paper trauma-exposed adults without axis I psychopathology. Journal of Anxiety
presented at the Western Academy of Management, Long Beach, CA. Disorders, 23, 297–303.
McKee, L., Zvolensky, M. J., Solomon, S. E., Bernstein, A., & Leen-Feldner, E. (2007). Walsh, J. J., Balint, M. G., Smolira, D. R., Fredericksen, L. K., & Madsen, S. (2009).
Emotional-vulnerability and mindfulness: A preliminary test of the associations Predicting individual differences in mindfulness: The role of trait anxiety,
among negative affectivity, anxiety sensitivity, and mindfulness skills. Cognitive attachment anxiety and attentional control. Personality and Individual
Behaviour Therapy, 36, 91–101. Differences, 46, 94–99.
Mitmansgruber, H., Beck, T. N., Höfer, S., & Schüßler, G. (2009). When you don’t like Waters, C. G. (2007). Personality and dissociation: Evidence from a slide-viewing
what you feel: Experiential avoidance, mindfulness and meta-emotion in physiology paradigm. Doctoral dissertation, North Dakota State University.
emotion regulation. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 448–453. Dissertation Abstracts International, 68 (5-B), 3435
Mitmansgruber, H., Beck, T. N., & Schüßler, G. (2008). ‘‘Mindful helpers”: Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience
Experiential avoidance, meta-emotions, and emotion regulation in aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465–490.
paramedics. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1358–1363. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of
McGraw-Hill. Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.
O’Loughlin, R. E., & Zuckerman, M. (2008). Mindfulness as a moderator of the Weick, K. E., & Putnam, T. (2006). Organizing for mindfulness: Eastern wisdom and
relationship between dehydroepiandrosterone and reported physical western knowledge. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15, 275–287.
symptoms. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1193–1202. Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2006). Mindfulness and the quality of organizational
Ong, J. C., Shapiro, S., & Manber, R. (2008). Combining mindfulness meditation with attention. Organization Science, 17, 514–524.
cognitive-behavior therapy for insomnia: A treatment-development study. Williams, J. C. (2007). Development of a multifaceted acceptance scale:
Behavior Therapy, 39, 171–182. Construction and initial validation. Master’s Thesis, State University of New
Ortner, C. N. M., Kilner, S. J., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Mindfulness meditation and York at Binghamton. Masters Abstracts International, 46.
reduced emotional interference on a cognitive task. Motivation and Emotion, 31, Wupperman, P., Neumann, C. S., & Axelrod, S. R. (2008). Do deficits in mindfulness
271–283. underlie borderline personality features and core difficulties? Journal of
Schmidt, F. L., Shaffer, J. A., & Oh, I. S. (2008). Increased accuracy for range restriction Personality Disorders, 22, 466–482.
corrections: Implications for the role of personality and general mental ability Zvolensky, M. J., Solomon, S. E., McLeish, A. C., Cassidy, D., Bernstein, A., Bowman, C.
in job and training performance. Personnel Psychology, 61, 827–868. J., et al. (2006). Incremental validity of mindfulness-based attention in relation
Schnitker, S. A., & Emmons, R. A. (2007). Patience as a virtue: Religious and to the concurrent prediction of anxiety and depressive symptomatology and
psychological perspectives. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion, 18, perceptions of health. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 35, 148–158.
177–207.