# paper.pdf ## Metadata - PDFFormatVersion=1.4 - Language=en - IsLinearized=false - IsAcroFormPresent=false - IsXFAPresent=false - IsCollectionPresent=false - IsSignaturesPresent=false - Title=Workplace Mindfulness Scale: A Non-Western Adaptation - Creator=Chromium - Producer=Skia/PDF m123 - CreationDate=D:20251017082444+00'00' - ModDate=D:20251017082444+00'00' ## Contents ### Page 1 [](https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7876869/v1) # Workplace Mindfulness Scale: A Non-Western Adaptation - ###### Zeynep Tunay Gül Yıldız Technical University - ###### Bülent Alcı Yıldız Technical University ###### Research Article ###### Keywords: ###### Posted Date: October 17th, 2025 ###### DOI: [https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7876869/v1](https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7876869/v1) ###### License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. [Read Full License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ###### Additional Declarations: No competing interests reported. ## ### Page 2 ## Abstract Objective This study extends workplace mindfulness to a non-Western context where business competition heightens its relevance for psychological well-being. The Workplace Mindfulness Scale (Zheng et al., 2023) was adapted to Turkish, and its validity and reliability were tested in a sample of Turkish employees, addressing occupational conditions in Turkey and providing a reliable tool to assess workplace mindfulness among employees. Method A two-stage design was used. First, linguistic equivalence was established with 65 bilingual academics through translation, synthesis, back-translation, expert review, and pretesting following cross-cultural adaptation guidelines. Second, the nalized Turkish WMS was administered online to 350 employees from public and private organizations across diverse departments. Analyses were conducted in SPSS and JASP (lavaan). Conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) tested the original three-factor, 18-item structure using DWLS estimation given non-normality. Reliability was assessed via Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω ; item–total correlations were inspected to evaluate internal consistency. Results Linguistic equivalence was supported: a strong positive correlation between English and Turkish forms (r = .97, p < .01) and no signicant mean differences on a dependent-samples t-test. CFA indicated good model t for the three-factor structure (attention, awareness and acceptance). Internal consistency was acceptable to good across factors with total α = .849 and item–total correlations generally in the .35–.71 range. Overall, the Turkish scale demonstrated satisfactory validity and reliability as a measure of workplace mindfulness among Turkish employees. Conclusion The instrument can be applied to studies on job motivation, well-being, performance, and mindfulness in professional contexts. ## 1. Introduction In modern life, the multitude of stimuli and the expectation of being fast and ecient can cause individuals to multitask in a relentless work pace, often without realizing it. In organizational settings shaped by eciency imperatives, employees are required to work eciently and present satisfactory performance. High performance demands not only present-moment attention but it also entails actively enacting one’s plans and intentions (Ajzen, 1991). On the other hand, according to the happy and productive employees’ hypothesis, higher levels of employee well-being are associated with better performance (Cropanzano &Wright, 2001). Therefore, organizations increasingly recognize well-being as a key factor in improving employee performance. The evolving nature of work in career counseling literature (Herr, 2003; Savickas, 2003) is driving interest in mindfulness as a remedy for anxiety and stress linked to employment ambiguity in the workplace (Blustein, 2008; Quillian-Wolever & Wolever, 2003) and well-being. Among employees, mindfulness is positively associated with work engagement and job satisfaction (Leroy et al., 2013) and negatively associated with turnover intentions (Hülsheger et al., 2013), and emotional exhaustion/burnout (Dane & Brummel, 2013). Since these outcomes are related to all cultures, the primary aim of the present study is to adapt the Workplace Mindfulness Scale (Zheng et al., 2023), to the context of Turkey, which is at the same time its rst non-Western adaptation. Measuring workplace mindfulness in the Turkish context can provide critical insights into employees’ psychological well-being and guide the development of interventions to enhance this capacity. This is particularly salient given the fact that Turkey ranks among the countries with the highest number of overtime workers in the world Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], (2022) revealing the current situation clearly by highlighting the strain on employees. Originated from Eastern meditation and is a way of focusing attention (Baer, 2003), mindfulness is the experience of attention and awareness in the present moment. Dr. Jon Kabat-Zinn, a pioneer known for his research and studies on mindfulness which dates back 2500 years and appears in Far Eastern doctrine, has integrated mindfulness into medical practices in the Western world since the 1970s, denes conscious awareness as follows:‘Focusing our attention on the present moment, on the experience we ### Page 3 are currently experiencing, perceiving and accepting this experience as it is’ (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). Regulating attention to the present, focusing, orienting to experience, openness, and acceptance are the basic opponents of mindfulness (Germer, Siegel & Fulton, 2005; Kabat-Zinn, 2003; Mackenzie, Poulin & Carlson, 2005). Finally, a further perspective (Baer et al., 2004, 2006) denes mindfulness as a composite of multiple facets, including the ability to observe, describe, and act with awareness, as well as the capacity to accept without judgment and remain non-reactive to internal experience. Inattention (mindlessness), absent- mindedness, indifference is the relative absence of mindfulness. It is the individual's refusal to pay attention to or accept a thought, emotion, motive, a perception that they oppose (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Mindfulness captures momentary experiences and functions that are clear and vivid. Inattention, in contrast, is the lack of awareness of habits, and automatic functions, which can be chronic for many individuals. There is a potential relationship between employee performance, absent-mindedness and awareness (Glomb et al. 2011; Shao & Skarlicki 2009). Research has presented that task performance is reduced by mind wandering (Smallwood & Schooler, 2014). On the other hand, awareness empowers individuals to be more attuned to their surroundings, equipping them to navigate challenging and unpredictable situations more adeptly (Dane, 2011; Salvato, 2009; Weick & Sutcliffe, 2006). It is worth emphasizing that the concept of awareness is one of the most fundamental aspects of mindfulness. Mindfulness is expected to provide positive organizational behavioural outcomes as it provides employees with skills such as solving problems with understanding, connecting with others and focusing on work. Positive organizational behaviour refers to an approach that is related to studying and applying measurable, developable, and manageable human strengths and psychological capacities to improve workplace performance, rather than weaknesses and negative attitudes (Luthans, 2002). Despite a growing body of research on the positive outcomes of mindfulness in many disciplines such as education (Weare, 2019), medicine (Chmielewski, 2021), neuroscience (Brewer, 2019), psychology (Phan et al., 2020), and clinical psychology (Pintado, 2019), recently, the impact of mindfulness on key aspects, such as job performance and career satisfaction which have a pivotal function in organizational effectiveness, has received scant attention in the literature on positive organizational behaviour. However, mindfulness practices enable individuals to regulate emotions and behaviors (Arch & Craske, 2006; Astin, 1997; Brown et al., 2007; Hill & Updegraff, 2012). In many studies, mindfulness based exercises strengthen interpersonal relationships (Dekeyser et al., 2008); reduce stress (Jensen et al., 2012; ), anxiety, and depression (Bajaj et al., 2016); increase life satisfaction (Amundsen et al., 2020; Chandrasekara, 2018; Gupta & Verma, 2020; Henriksson et al., 2016; Kong et al., 2014; Lotzke et al., 2016) increase professional satisfaction (Raza et al, 2018), job performance (King & Haar, 2017); increases professional commitment (Johnson et al., 2020; Monteiro & Padhy, 2020). Another study demonstrates that positive affect serves as a proximal daily mechanism through which trait mindfulness shapes experiences of vigor, fatigue, concentration, and rumination. Moreover, mindfulness has positive effects on well-being (Brown et al., 2009), emotional exhaustion (Hülsheger et al., 2013) and turnover intention (Andrews et al., 2014). Last of all, mindfulness has been found to contribute more to employees' work engagement (Gunasekara & Zheng, 2018). A plausible mechanism for these ndings is the regulation of attentional resources on the task at hand. According to Beal et al. (2005), performance can be negatively inuenced by affective processes like rumination and arousal, which draw away the required attentional resources from the task at hand. Perfectionistic concerns, viewed as maladaptive perseverative cognitions, can prolong psychophysiological activation and, in turn, impair employee functioning— namely, by increasing stress and impeding recovery (Kleszewski et al., 2025). Mindfulness is associated with emotion regulation and reduced rumination in a positive way (Brown & Ryan 2003), which potentially may reduce how much emotions interfere with performance. It can be important for dissociating from automatic thinking processes, conditioned routines or habits and unhealthy behavioural tendencies as well. Thus, the individual's regulation of his/her own behaviour, which is related to increasing well-being, may play a key role (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Ryan & Deci, 2000). As organizational scholars have turned their attention to explore the role of mindfulness in the workplace, a crucial area of human activity, mindfulness practices have accordingly gained popularity in the development of management programs (Shahbaz & Parker 2022; Zhang et al. 2021). Consistent with prior work, the study ndings showed that when a health-promotion intervention is grounded in mindfulness, participants exhibit signicant gains in mindful awareness, healthier lifestyle choices, stress management, lower perceived anxiety, greater resilience, and a stronger sense of relational security (Ray and Flessati, 2025). In line with this perspective, curriculum-based evidence indicates that mindfulness-centered instruction yields broad benets that are directly relevant to work settings and directly applicable to organizational and workplace contexts. These trends underscore the rationale for systematically assessing workplace mindfulness before turning to measurement tools. Addressing the identied scarcity of research on mindfulness within ### Page 4 organizational settings, particularly concerning employee samples in diverse cultural contexts, the imperative for culturally sensitive and validated measurement instruments becomes evident. To better comprehend the role of mindfulness in occupational settings, Zheng et al. (2023) developed and empirically tested the Workplace Mindfulness Scale within a work-specic framework, following a systematic seven-phase process and identied 3 factors. The Cronbach’sα scores for three factors; attention, awareness, acceptance, and the overall scale were 0.89, 0.89, 0.77 and 0.91, respectively (Zheng et al., 2023). Consequently, this comprehensive approach yielded a reliable 18-item Workplace Mindfulness Scale, the validity of which was supported by its psychometric properties. More recently, Zivnuska et al. (2016) proposed a single-dimension, ve-item workplace mindfulness scale; however, Zheng et al. (2023) introduced the Workplace Mindfulness Scale as a psychometrically robust instrument validated through rigorous and comprehensive procedures. Research conducted in recent years has shown that Turkey has experienced a signicant decline in terms of well-being indicators. According to Gallup’s Global Emotions Report (2024), Turkey is one of the countries that experience the least positive emotions in the world. Among 142 countries, Turkey is one of the 3 countries with the lowest rate of experiencing a positive emotion in a day. According to results, Turkey belongs to the most negative quartile. To facilitate a more nuanced understanding of workplace mindfulness among Turkish employees, who navigate demanding professional landscapes, alongside comparatively low well- being scores, the current study focuses on the adaptation and psychometric evaluation of an existing scale, the Workplace Mindfulness Scale (Zheng et al., 2023), specically designed to assess this construct within a work environment. This new (Turkish version) instrument offers a noteworthy tool for researchers, professionals, and practitioners to evaluate mindfulness levels of employees in work settings, enabling the collection of additional evidence on the connections between workplace mindfulness and work-related outcomes as well as the concept of well-being. ## 2. Methods In this study, it is aimed to reveal the structure of the Turkish version of the Workplace Mindfulness Scale developed by Zheng et al., (2023) and to verify the validity and reliability of the adapted scale in a sample of employees in Turkey. The study consisted of two stages. First, the linguistic equivalence of the scale was determined with 65 academics working at an English-centred university in Turkey and were conrmed to be competent in both languages. The linguistic equivalence process consists of the scale translation from the native language to the target language, comparing, and analysing the translations, making a backward translation, getting the rst form of the translated scale, conducting a pilot study and performing statistical analyses for language validity, and giving the nal version to the form which the language validity is provided. The next step was the implementation of cross-cultural research with 350 participants who were currently working in various companies from Turkey. Detailed information about the participants, original scale, and operations performed on the different samples are explained in detail below. 2.1. Participants For the rst stage of the study, 65 employees participated. In this stage, it was aimed to determine the items’ consistency in Turkish by testing both the original scale and its adapted form to adults who were competent in both languages. The nal form of the adapted scale was administered on a total of 350 employees who worked for public and private companies in Turkey. In terms of the sample's features, women make up 66,3% of the total, while men account for 33,7%. The departments of the participants working vary from human resources, IT, accounting, nance, marketing, research and development (R&D), education, medicine and production. 2.2. Data collection tool 2.2.1. Workplace Mindfulness Scale For the development of the original scale by (Zheng et al., 2023), the researchers conducted the scale development for the Workplace Mindfulness Scale through a systematic process across seven phases: - Item Generation: They employed both deductive and inductive approaches to create an initial pool of items. This involved adapting existing mindfulness items to the workplace context and generating new items based on critical incidents reported by participants. - - - - - - ### Page 5 - - Item Reduction: Three Ph.D. students evaluated the initial items for clarity and relevance, resulting in a rened pool of 52 items. - Content Validity: Experts assessed the content validity of these items to ensure they accurately reected the dimensions of workplace mindfulness, leading to a nal pool of 38 items. - Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA): Conducted on the 38 items with a sample of employees, identifying three factors corresponding to awareness, attention, and acceptance, and resulting in 33 retained items. - Conrmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): The researchers tested the factor structure with a different sample to conrm that the three dimensions represented a second-order construct of workplace mindfulness. - Convergent and Discriminant Validity: They examined the relationships of the WMS with other constructs to validate its uniqueness. - Predictive Validity: Finally, they tested the scale's predictive validity regarding various work-related outcomes, showing that it effectively correlates with emotional and job performance indicators. Finally, The Cronbach’sα scores for attention, awareness, acceptance, and the overall scale were 0.89, 0.89, 0.77 and 0.91, respectively (Zheng et al., 2023). This structured approach across seven phases culminated in a sound 18-item Workplace Mindfulness Scale with valid psychometric properties. 2.3. Procedure 2.3.1. Scale adaptation and validation In order to ask for a permission to adapt the Workplace Mindfulness Scale to Turkish, the corresponding author was sent an e- mail. After obtaining the necessary permissions to ensure that the scale had not previously been translated into Turkish, an application was submitted to the Social Sciences Scientic Research and Publication Ethics Committee of XXXXXX for ethical approval, and an ethics committee report was soon obtained. Next step was ensuring cultural and linguistic equivalency. In this study, 5 steps were performed by following the guidelines proposed by Beaton et al. (2020) grounded in certain procedures followed for translation and adaptation of the scale (Figure 1). The rst stage of this was Translation. For this purpose, eld experts with a master’s degree and minimum ve-year experience of teaching English Language participated in the translation group. The Turkish translation was carried separately by three different experienced lecturers none of whom knew each other in a way to make sure that there was no interaction with each other. The second stage, Synthesis was about collecting and comparing of different translations obtained from the language experts. For this reason, all the language experts came together with an online meeting platform to give shape to the Turkish form. After reaching an agreement on the disagreed items, the translation was presented to a Turkish language expert who is competent in both languages. After the recommendations given by the Turkish language expert to the scale, which was examined for spelling and grammar, minor adjustments in a few words were made without deviating from the meaning. In the third stage-Backward Translation-the Turkish version of the scale to be translated back into English was sent to another group of three different English lecturers, who were not in the rst translation stage. In this way, independent language experts had participated in these two translation processes. Stage 4, Pretesting demonstrated that no signicant difference was observed between the two scales which were compared by both the language experts and researchers. For the nal stage, pretesting, a pilot study was conducted to test the items’ consistency in Turkish. First, data were collected from 65 employees at a private company in Turkey via the original form (in English). In the same way, the same group lled out the Turkish form of the scale. To validate the scale, a pilot study was conducted. Results showed a high Pearson correlation coecient between the Turkish and English versions of the scale. Furthermore, the t-Test for Dependent Samples, which was conducted to reveal whether there is a statistically signicant difference between the Turkish and English items of the scale, revealed no statistically signicant differences between the mean scores of the original English items and their Turkish translations. After all these procedures, the nal Turkish version of the Workplace Mindfulness Scale was obtained and ready for application. The nal form of the scale was sent online by using a Google Form to 350 employees in Turkey from different cities, companies, and department. In the rst part of the form, it was clearly stated that the participation is voluntary, and the data obtained would ### Page 6 only be used within the scope of scientic research. The data collection process took nearly 2 months. ## 3. Results This section presents the ndings regarding the linguistic equivalence, validity, and reliability studies of the Workplace Mindfulness Scale. All data were analyzed via IBM SPSS 22 and Latent Variable Analysis (Lavaan) module in JASP software programs. ## 3.1. Linguistic Equivalence In order to test the linguistic equivalence of the scale, 65 employees working in a private company from Turkey were rst administered the English form of the scale, then the Turkish form in January 2025. According to the results of the correlation analysis, it was found that there was a highly positive and signicant relationship between the English and Turkish forms of the scale (r = .97, p < .01). Correlation analysis results are presented in Table 1. Table 1 | - | Item Total Correlation Analysis Between English and Turkish Scales. | N | p | r | | The Original Version (EN)The Adapted Version (TR) | 65 | 0,00* | ,973 | | p < .01 | In addition, as a result of the t-Test for dependent samples, which was conducted to reveal whether there is a statistically signicant difference between the Turkish and English items of the scale, it was found that there was no statistically signicant difference between the original English item mean score and the Turkish item mean score [t (65) =,815, p > 0.01].The data presented herein indicates that the Workplace Mindfulness Scale satises the criteria for linguistic equivalence. Table 2 provides a comprehensive overview of the dependent samples t-test analysis. Table 2 | - | t-Test Results for Dependent Samples Examining the Relationship Between Turkish and English Scale Items. | N | x̄ | Ss | Sd | t | p | | The Original Version (EN) | 65 | 56,0 | ,679 | 5,47 | ,815 | ,418 | | The Adapted Version (TR) | 55,5 | ## 3.2. Structural Validation Conrmatory Factor Analysis was used to test whether the original Workplace Mindfulness Scale, which was developed as a three-factor scale, retained its three-dimensional structure in Turkish culture or not. As the assumption of multiple normality between the items was not met, parameter estimation was performed with the Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (DWLS) method. In the case of adaptation of the developed scale to the Turkish culture, the t indices of whether the three-factor model is compatible with the data are shown in Table 3. ### Page 7 Table 3 | - | Model Data Fit Indices | Model | | Comparative Fit Index (CFI) | 0.957 | | Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) | 0.949 | | Bentler-Bonett Non-normed Fit Index (NNFI) | 0.949 | | Bentler-Bonett Normed Fit Index (NFI) | 0.918 | | Parsimony Normed Fit Index (PNFI) | 0.783 | | Bollen's Relative Fit Index (RFI) | 0.903 | | Bollen's Incremental Fit Index (IFI) | 0.957 | | Relative Noncentrality Index (RNI) | 0.957 | | S-RMR | 0.070 | | RMSEA | 0.054 | | Lower- Upper 90% CI for RMSEA | 0.043–0.063 | | p-value RMSEA < = 0.05 | 0.272 | According to the t criteria accepted as CFI, TLI, IFI, RNI ≥ 0.95 → excellent t; PNFI ≥ 0.70 → good t, the three-factor structure of the scale shows validity for Turkish culture. Since RMSEA = 0.054, it can be said that the model ts the data well. The fact that the t indices have good t values indicates that the original scale model ts the data collected with the three-dimensional scale well and conrms the theoretical structure. In other words, the three-factor Turkish form of 18-item Workplace Mindfulness Scale is a valid and reliable measurement model. It was observed that the standardized factor loadings of all items were above 0.30. This impies, it can be concluded that the scale items adequately represent the relevant factors. Table 4. ### Page 8 Table 4 | - | Standardized Factor Loadings | Factor No | Item No | Estimation | Std. Error | z | p | CI (lower) | CI (upper) | Factor Loading | | Factor1 | =~ | I1 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.588 | | Factor1 | =~ | I2 | 0.799 | 0.068 | 11.782 | < .001 | 0.666 | 0.931 | 0.617 | | Factor1 | =~ | I3 | 1.071 | 0.092 | 11.584 | < .001 | 0.890 | 1.253 | 0.615 | | Factor1 | =~ | I4 | 0.587 | 0.067 | 8.773 | < .001 | 0.456 | 0.718 | 0.351 | | Factor1 | =~ | I5 | 0.884 | 0.077 | 11.513 | < .001 | 0.734 | 1.035 | 0.586 | | Factor1 | =~ | I6 | 1.089 | 0.091 | 11.994 | < .001 | 0.911 | 1.267 | 0.710 | | Factor2 | =~ | I7 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.573 | | Factor2 | =~ | I9 | 1.177 | 0.113 | 10.456 | < .001 | 0.956 | 1.397 | 0.433 | | Factor2 | =~ | I10 | 1.689 | 0.133 | 12.690 | < .001 | 1.428 | 1.950 | 0.739 | | Factor2 | =~ | I11 | 1.560 | 0.127 | 12.326 | < .001 | 1.312 | 1.808 | 0.704 | | Factor2 | =~ | I12 | 1.728 | 0.142 | 12.170 | < .001 | 1.449 | 2.006 | 0.625 | | Factor3 | =~ | I13 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.713 | | Factor3 | =~ | I14 | 0.683 | 0.066 | 10.366 | < .001 | 0.554 | 0.812 | 0.438 | | Factor3 | =~ | I15 | 0.882 | 0.074 | 11.913 | < .001 | 0.737 | 1.027 | 0.626 | | Factor3 | =~ | I16 | 1.026 | 0.084 | 12.263 | < .001 | 0.862 | 1.190 | 0.656 | | Factor3 | =~ | I17 | 0.872 | 0.076 | 11.441 | < .001 | 0.723 | 1.022 | 0.541 | | Factor3 | =~ | I18 | 0.892 | 0.079 | 11.248 | < .001 | 0.736 | 1.047 | 0.531 | ## 3.3. Reliability To test the reliability of the scale, Cronbach's Alpha ( α ) and McDonald's Omega ( ω ) were calculated. In Factor 1, both reliability coecients showed similar results. The rst factor of the scale was found to have high internal consistency. Factor 2 also had very high reliability indicators and was found to have a triple internal consistency. Factor 3 was similarly found to have good reliability values. Overall, all three factors in the scale were found to have a high internal consistency. It is shown in Table 5. ### Page 9 Table 5 | - | Cronbach's Alpha ( α ) McDonald's Omega ( ω ) Internal Consistency Coecients | Estimate | McDonald's ω | Cronbach's α | | Factor1 | Point estimate | 0.754 | 0.761 | | 95% CI lower bound | 0.715 | 0.719 | | 95% CI upper bound | 0.794 | 0.798 | | Factor2 | Point estimate | 0.793 | 0.790 | | 95% CI lower bound | 0.759 | 0.754 | | 95% CI upper bound | 0.826 | 0.823 | | Factor3 | Point estimate | 0.770 | 0.767 | | 95% CI lower bound | 0.733 | 0.727 | | 95% CI upper bound | 0.807 | 0.802 | Item-test correlations ranged between 0.426 and 0.553 for the rst factor, between 0.351 and 0.709 for the second factor, and between 0.426 and 0.553 for the third factor. In general, the items were found to have a strong relationship with the factor. The total Cronbach's alpha coecient of the scale was calculated as 0.849. Item-total correlations, known as item validity coecients, are shown in Table 6. Table 6 | - | Item-total correlations and Total Cronbach's Alpha coecient | Factor No | Item | Item-total correlation | Cronbach Alfa | | Factor1 | I1 | 0.426 | 0.849 | | I2 | 0.491 | | I3 | 0.507 | | I4 | 0.553 | | I5 | 0.551 | | I6 | 0.533 | | Factor2 | I7 | 0.554 | | I8 | 0.660 | | I9 | 0.351 | | I10 | 0.709 | | I11 | 0.599 | | I12 | 0.492 | | Factor3 | I13 | 0.426 | | I14 | 0.491 | | I15 | 0.507 | | I16 | 0.553 | | I17 | 0.551 | | I18 | 0.533 | ### Page 10 In the rst factor, item–test correlations range from 0.426 to 0.553; in the second factor, they range from 0.351 to 0.709; and in the third factor, from 0.426 to 0.553. Overall, the items were found to have a strong relationship with their respective factors. ## 4. Discussion It is known that psychological resources (Avey et al., 2010), positive emotions, and emotional experiences (Fredrickson, 2001), and positive personality traits (Brown & Ryan, 2003) increase employee performance and well-being. In this context, positive psychological capital and mindfulness stand out as important concepts in enhancing employee well-being. Yet, mindfulness research has predominantly focused on non-workplace contexts (Baer et al., 2004; Brown & Ryan, 2003). While the core principle of mindfulness remains consistent regardless of setting, its manifestation differs across contexts due to the unique characteristics inherent in a professional environment compared to non-work contexts (Dane & Brummel, 2013; Zivnuska et al.,2016). In certain professions, individuals’ mindfulness levels are consequential; for example, physicians with lower mindfulness levels pose a critical risk, compromising clinical performance and adversely affecting patient care (Gümü ş Özçelik et al., 2025). As a matter of fact, mindfulness practice is recognized as one of the tools for improving the workplace (Petchsawang & McLean,2017). Employees in the workplace function within task-driven processes, workows, and employment relations (Zivnuska et al.,2016). Therefore, the ways in which mindfulness appears in everyday life are not identical to how it manifests in work settings. Prior research has further shown that using a frame of reference (e.g., the workplace) strengthens the criterion-related validity of context-specic measures (Lievens et al., 2008). Consequently, when a mindfulness scale overlooks the specic context, situational differences may be neglected, which in turn can weaken both its explanatory power and predictive validity (Robie et al., 2000). Therefore, addressing this highly signicant, multidimensional matter requires incorporating employees’ self-assessments of workplace mindfulness, especially as situated within organizational contexts. With this purpose in mind, this study aimed to adapt the workplace mindfulness scale into Turkish context where occupational stress and workload are notably high (Akdeniz et al., 2023; Palancı et al., 2021). Here, “workplace mindfulness” refers to employees’ beliefs about their capacity to remain at present and attentive to their tasks, interactions and internal experiences within organizational settings. In the rst part (language equivalence validity) of the study, 65 academics from a private university took part in. The results showed that there found to retain a statistically signicant relationship between the original and Turkish form in a positive direction. Moreover, the dependent sample t-test result demonstrated no statistically signicant difference between both forms which indicates that the scale provides the condition of linguistic equivalence. The nal version of the scale was tested on a group of 350 employees working in a variety of departments from public and private companies in Turkey. According to the results of the Exploratory Factor Analysis, the original version of the scale was retained as 18 items in total, with 3 factors (awareness, attention, and acceptance) as in the original form. While the Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency coecient calculated for the rst factor consisting of 6 items was found to be .703; The Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency coecient calculated for the second factor consisting of 6 items was found to be .856 and the third factor with 6 items was found to be ,768. This shows that the scale is highly reliable and has strong consistency. When the results of Conrmatory Factor Analysis are examined, it is seen that the scale has acceptable t indices. It was obtained high internal consistency as the Cronbach’s Alpha coecient of the 18-item scale was 0.849. Therefore, the reliability of the scale is high, and the internal consistency between the items is high, so it is as it is expected and desired in this study. To testify the construct validity of the adapted scale, item, and test analyses were performed with the help of the Classical Test Theory (CTT), which is known to be widely applied, practical, and benecial (Hambleton, 2002). This scale, which has been adapted to Turkish, will serve to comparing and understanding the level of workplace mindfulness in the Turkish context. Nevertheless, this study has some limitations. At the time of completing the scale, it is not known whether participants were working in person at the oce or remotely online. Accordingly, future research could include an item addressing the potential inuence of working arrangements (in-oce vs. online) on the workforce. In addition, this research was limited with 350 participants. Future researchers can be suggested to include a larger number of participants. Lastly, the study can be repeated by separate participants divided by working groups as part-time and full-time as in the current study, there is not such a distinction. ## 5. Conclusion ### Page 11 In sum, Workplace Mindfulness Scale was introduced to the Turkish literature as a valid and reliable data collection tool consistent with the initial aim of this scale adaptation study. In this way, the study is thought to contribute to lling a gap as no Turkish scale on the topic exists. In this sense, the adapted scale was considered to be a valid and reliable tool that will assist researchers and practitioners in Turkey to obtain data for determining employees’ mindfulness in working situations. The study is believed to have great importance since it will help to reach an expressive demonstration of how employees perceive themselves (mindful or not) in their job environments, which parts need more improvement, and what can be done to be a more mindful individual at work. Finally, this adapted scale can nally be applied for research concerning job motivation, attention, well-being, creativity in workplace, gender differences in terms of mindfulness, job performance, attitudes towards mindfulness, and positive communication in professional life. Acknowledging the impact of professional success on human psychology, we hope that the Turkish form of Workplace Mindfulness Scale will enable researchers and practitioners to measure the relationship between mindfulness which is an important part of psychological well-being, and its levels in the context of Turkey, lead to improvements in the content of working situations and serve as a life-long tool. Through this rigorous methodology, the researchers ensured that the Turkish version of the Workplace Mindfulness Scale was both reliable and valid for assessing workplace mindfulness in the context of Turkey. ## Declarations ## Author Contribution The authors declare that they contributed equally to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, and writing of this manuscript ## Acknowledgement The article is based on the rst author’s doctoral dissertation, which is currently under review and has not yet been published. ## Data Availability Data is provided within the manuscript or supplementary information les. ## References - Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T - Akdeniz, Ş ., Çoban, M., Koç, O., Pekesen, M., Korkmaz Yaylagül, N., Sönmez, S., Yetiz, F., Ba ş ıbüyük, G. Ö., Efe, M., Ergun, A. D., & Tufan, İ . (2023). Determination of workload, work stress and related factors in nursing home workers during the COVID ‐ 19 pandemic in Turkey.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(1), 160. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010160 - Amundsen, R., Riby, L. M., Hamilton, C., Hope, M., and McGann, D. (2020). Mindfulness in primary school children as a route to enhanced life satisfaction, positive outlook and effective emotion regulation.BMC Psychol. 8:71. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-00428-y - Andrews, Martha & Kacmar, K. & Kacmar, Charles. (2014). The mediational effect of regulatory focus on the relationships between mindfulness and job satisfaction and turnover intentions.Career Development International. 19 (5): 494–507. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-02-2014-0018 - Arch, J. J., & Craske, M. G. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness: Emotion regulation following a focused breathing induction.Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(12), 1849–1858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.12.007. - Astin J. A. (1997). Stress reduction through mindfulness meditation. Effects on psychological symptomatology, sense of control, and spiritual experiences.Psychotherapy and psychosomatics,66(2), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1159/000289116 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ### Page 12 - - - - - - - Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., Smith, R. M., & Palmer, N. F. (2010). Impact of positive psychological capital on employee well-being over time.Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016998. - Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: a conceptual and empirical review.Clinical psychology: Science and practice,10(2), 125. - Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of Mindfulness by Self-Report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills.Assessment,11(3), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191104268029 - 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 - Bajaj, Badri & Robins, Richard & Pande, Neerja. (2016). Mediating role of self-esteem on the relationship between mindfulness, anxiety, and depression.Personality and Individual Differences. 96. 127-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.02.085 - Beal, D. J., Weiss, H. M., Barros, E., & MacDermid, S. M. (2005). An episodic process model of affective inuences on performance.Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1054–1068. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1054 - Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self- report measures.Spine,25(24):3186-91. 25(24):p 3186-3191, December 15, 2000. - Blustein, D. L. (2008). The role of work in psychological health and well-being: A conceptual, historical, and public policy perspective.American Psychologist, 63(4), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.4.228 - Brewer, Judson. (2019). Mindfulness training for addictions: has neuroscience revealed a brain hack by which awareness subverts the addictive process?.Current Opinion in Psychology. 28. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.01.014. - Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benets of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 - Brown, K. W., Ryan, R. M., & Creswell, J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: Theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects.Psychological Inquiry, 18(4), 211–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400701598298 - Brown, K. W., Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Linley, P. A., & Orzech, K. (2009). When what one has is enough: Mindfulness, nancial desire discrepancy, and subjective well-being.Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 727–736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.07.002 - Chandrasekara, W. S. (2018). The effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention on depression, stress, mindfulness and life satisfaction in secondary school students in Sri Lankan.Int. J. Inf. Bus. Manage. 10, 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12568 - Chmielewski, J., Lo ś , K., Waszkiewicz, N., & Luczy ń ski, W. (2021). Mindfulness Is Related to the Situational Awareness of Medical Students Confronted with Life-Threatening Emergency Situations.Journal of Clinical Medicine,10(9), 1955. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10091955. - Cropanzano, R., & Wright, T. A. (2001). When a "happy" worker is really a "productive" worker: A review and further renement of the happy-productive worker thesis.Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(3), 182–199. https://doi.org/10.1037/1061-4087.53.3.182 - Dane, E. (2010). Paying Attention to Mindfulness and Its Effects on Task Performance in the Workplace.Journal of Management,37(4), 997-1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310367948 (Original work published 2011) - Dane, E., & Brummel, B. J. (2013). Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to job performance and turnover intention.Human Relations,67(1), 105-128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726713487753 (Original work published 2014) - Dekeyser, Mathias & Raes, Filip & Leijssen, Mia & Leysen, Sara & Dewulf, David. (2008). Mindfulness skills and interpersonal behaviour.Personality and Individual Differences. 44. 1235-1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.11.018 - Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions.American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218 - Gallup. (2024).Gallup global emotions 2024 report. https://www.gallup.com. - Glomb, T. M., Duffy, M. K., Bono, J. E., & Yang, T. (2011). Mindfulness at work.Research in Personnel and Human ResourceManagement, 30, 115–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0742-7301(2011)0000030005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ### Page 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Gunasekara, Asanka & Zheng, Connie. (2018). Examining the effect of different facets of mindfulness on work engagement.Employee Relations. 41. 10.1108/ER-09-2017-0220. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-09-2017-0220 - Gupta, S., and Verma, H. V. (2020). Mindfulness, mindful consumption, and life satisfaction: an experiment with higher education students.J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 12, 456–474. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-11-2018-0235 - Gümü ş Özçelik, A., Unus Yılmaz, Z., Tural, E. (2025). Examining the relationship between mindfulness levels and burnout syndrome among family medicine residents.Discover Psychology. 5, 69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44202-025-00394-9 - Hambleton, R. K. (2002). Adapting achievement tests into multiple languages for international assessments.Methodological Advances in Cross-National Surveys of Educational Achievement, 58–79. - Henriksson, J., Wasara, E., and Rönnlund, M. (2016). Effects of eight-week-web-based mindfulness training on pain intensity, pain acceptance, and life satisfaction in individuals with chronic pain.Psychol. Rep. 119, 586–607. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116675086 - Herr, E.L. (2003), The Future of Career Counseling as an Instrument of Public Policy.The Career Development Quarterly, 52: 8- 17. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2003.tb00622.x - Hill, C. L. M., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Mindfulness and its relationship to emotional regulation.Emotion, 12(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026355 - Hülsheger, U. R., Alberts, H. J. E. M., Feinholdt, A., & Lang, J. W. B. (2013). Benets of mindfulness at work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction.Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 310– 325. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031313 - Jensen, C.G., Vangkilde, S., Frokjaer, V. ve Hasselbalch, S.G. (2012). Mindfulness training affects attention– or is it attentional effort?.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 106-123. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024931 - Johnson, Karen & Park, Sunyoung & Chaudhuri, Sanghamitra. (2020). Mindfulness training in the workplace: exploring its scope and outcomes.European Journal of Training and Development.10.1108/EJTD-09-2019-0156. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-09-2019-0156 - Kabat-Zinn, J. (1994).Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday life. New York, NY: Hyperion. - Kabat ‐ Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness ‐ based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology:Science and Practice,10(2), 144-156. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1093/clipsy.bpg016 - Katz, E. (2014).Mindfulness and Psychotherapy, edited by C. K. Germer, R. D. Siegel, and P. R. Fulton: (2013). (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press, 382 pp., $45.00.Smith College Studies in Social Work,84(1), 132–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2014.861286 - King, E., & Haar, J. M. (2017). Mindfulness and job performance: A study of Australian leaders.Asia Pacic Journal of Human Resources, 55(3), 298–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12143 - Kleszewski, E., Wehrt, W., Otto, K.et al. Opening Windows: Effects of an App-Based Mindfulness Intervention on Perfectionistic Concerns and Cross-Domain Functioning.J Bus Psychol (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-025-10033-8 - Kong, F. Wang, X. ve Zhao, J. (2014). Dispositional mindfulness and life satisfaction: the role of core self-evaluations.Personality And Individual Differences, 56, 165-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.09.002 - Leroy, H., Anseel, F., Dimitrova, N. G., & Sels, L. (2013). Mindfulness, authentic functioning, and work engagement: A growth modeling approach.Journal of Vocational Behavior,82(3), 238-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.01.012 - Lievens, F., De Corte, W., & Schollaert, E. (2008). A closer look at the frame-of-reference effect in personality scale scores and validity.Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.268 - Lötzke, D., Wiedemann, F., Rodrigues Recchia, D., Ostermann, T., Sattler, D., Ettl, J., et al. (2016). Iyengar-yoga compared to exercise as a therapeutic intervention during (Neo)adjuvant therapy in women with stage I-III breast cancer: health-related quality of life, mindfulness, spirituality, life satisfaction, and cancer-related fatigue.Evid. Based Complement. Alternat. Med.2016:5931816. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5931816 - Luthans, Fred. (2002). The Need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior.Journal of Organizational Behavior. 23. 695 - 706. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.165 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ### Page 14 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mackenzie, C. S., Poulin, P. A., & Carlson, R. S. (2005). A brief mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention for nurses and nurse aides.Applied Nursing Research, 19, 105-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2005.08.002 - Monteiro, S., & Padhy, M. (2020). improving work performance: Examining the role of mindfulness and perceived control of internal states in work engagement.International Journal of Behavioral Sciences,14(1), 27–33. - OECD. (2022). Average annual hours actually worked per worker. OECD.Stat. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx? DataSetCode=ANHRS. - Palancı, Y., Mengenci, C., Bayraktaro ğ lu, S., & Emhan, A. (2021). Analysis of workplace health and safety, job stress, interpersonal conict, and turnover intention: A comparative study in the health sector.Health Psychology Report,9(1), 76– 86. https://doi.org/10.5114/hpr.2020.99971. - Petchsawang, P., & McLean, G. N. (2017). Workplace spirituality, mindfulness meditation, and work engagement.Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion,14(3), 216–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766086.2017.1291360 - Phan, Huy & Ngu, Bing & Chen, Si & Wu, Lijuing & Lin, Wei-Wen & Hsu, Chao-Sheng. (2020). Introducing the Study of Life and Death Education to Support the Importance of Positive Psychology: An Integrated Model of Philosophical Beliefs, Religious Faith, and Spirituality.Frontiers in Psychology.11, 580186. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.580186 - Pintado, S. (2019). Changes in body awareness and self ‐ compassion in clinical psychological trainees through a mindfulness program.Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 34, 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2018.12.010 - Quillian-Wolever, R. E., & Wolever, M. E. (2003). Stress management at work. In J. C. Quick & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.),Handbook of occupational health psychology (pp. 355–375). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10474-017. - Ray, H.A., Flessati, S. Mind Power: A Holistic Mindful-Based Health Promotion Course for University Students.Mindfulness16, 2570–2585 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-025-02648-y - Raza, B., Ali, M., Naseem, K., Moeed, A., Ahmed, J., & Hamid, M. (2018). Impact of trait mindfulness on job satisfaction and turnover intentions: Mediating role of work–family balance and moderating role of work–family conict.Cogent Business & Management,5(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1542943. - Salvato, C. (2009). Capabilities unveiled: the role of ordinary activities in the evolution of product development processes.Organization Science, 20(2), 384–409. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0408 - Savickas, M.L. (2003), Advancing the career counseling profession: objectives and strategies for the next decade.The Career Development Quarterly, 52: 87-96. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2003.tb00631.x - Shahbaz, W., and Parker, J., (2022). Workplace Mindfulness: An Integrative Review of Antecedents, Mediators, and Moderators.Human Resource Management Review 32: 100849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100849 - Shao, R., & Skarlicki, D. P. (2009). The role of mindfulness in predicting individual performance.Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 41(4), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015166 - Smallwood, J. & Schooler, J. (2014).The science of mind wandering: empirically navigating the stream of consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology. 66:487-518. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015331 - Weare, Katherine. (2019). Mindfulness and Contemplative Approaches in Education.Current Opinion in Psychology.28, 321– 326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.001 - Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2006). Mindfulness and the quality of organizational attention.Organization Science, 17(4), 514–524. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0196 - Zhang, Dexing, Eric K. P. Lee, Eva C. W. Mak, Chi Y. Ho, and Samuel Y. S. Wong. (2021). Mindfulness-Based Interventions: An Overall Review.British Medical Bulletin. 138: 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldab005 - Zheng, X., Ni, D., Liu, X., & Liang, L. H. (2023). Workplace Mindfulness: Multidimensional Model, Scale Development and Validation.Journal of Business and Psychology, 38, 777-801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09814-2 - Zivnuska, S., Kacmar, K, M., Ferguson, M., & Carlson, D.S. (2016). Mindfulness at work: resource accumulation, well-being, and attitudes.Career Development International,21 (2): 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-06-2015-0086 ## Figures ### Page 15 ## Figure 1 Scale adaptation stages.