Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcbs Psychometric properties of the engaged living scale (ELS) Spanish version in a large sample of Spanish pilgrims Jaime Navarrete a, b, c, 1, Ariadna Colomer-Carbonell a, b, c, d, 1, Juan P. Sanabria-Mazo a, b, c, d, Juan V. Luciano a, b, c, e, *, Joaquim Soler f, g, Javier García-Campayo h, Marcelo Demarzo i, Jesús Montero-Marín a, b, c, j, Ernst T. Bohlmeijer k, Daniel Campos l, 2, Ausiàs Cebolla m, n, 2, Albert Feliu-Soler e, 2 a Institut de Recerca Sant Joan de Déu, Esplugues de Llobregat, Spain b Teaching, Research & Innovation Unit, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain c CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain d Department of Basics, Developmental, and Educational Psychology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellatera, Spain e Department of Clinical & Health Psychology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain f Department of Psychiatry, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain g CIBER of Mental Health (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain h Miguel Servet Hospital, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain i Mente Aberta, Brazilian Center for Mindfulness and Health Promotion, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil j Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK k Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands l Department of Psychology and Sociology, Faculty of Humanities and Educational Sciences, University of Zaragoza, Huesca, Spain m Department of Personality, Evaluation, and Psychological Treatments, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain n CIBER Physiopathology of Obesity and Nutrition (CIBEROBN), Madrid, Spain A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Keywords: Engaged Living (values clarity and committed action) is a main process of psychological flexibility as defined by Engaged living Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. The Engaged Living Scale (ELS) was designed to measure it. The purpose Pilgrimage of this study was to translate the ELS to Spanish and to examine the reliability and validity of its scores in a Engaged living scale heterogeneous sample of 752 Spanish pilgrims of the Way of Saint James (pre-post analysis: n = 285). Confir­ Factor structure Network analysis matory factor analyses were computed to study the structural validity of the ELS scores. In addition, network analyses were computed to examine convergent and discriminant validity. The included variables were engaged living, mindfulness facets, satisfaction with life, subjective happiness, affect, depression, anxiety, and perceived stress. Results showed that the Spanish version of the ELS is two-factorial (valued living [VL] and life fulfillment [LF]). The ELS scores showed good reliability. In addition, it was able to detect VL and LF changes after the Way underscoring its sensitivity to change. The network analyses indicated adequate convergent and discriminant validity of the ELS. Changes in satisfaction with life, life fulfillment, happiness, and valued living scores were most strongly associated with changes in perceived stress, affect, mindfulness facets, depression, and anxiety. In short, the Spanish version of the ELS appeared to be a reliable and valid instrument to assess the engaged response style in the current samples. 1. Introduction third-wave Cognitive Behavioural Therapy that has shown empirical evidence for the treatment of physical and mental health problems Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT; Hayes et al., 1999) is a (A-Tjak et al., 2015; Öst, 2014; Powers et al., 2009; Ruiz, 2012), such as * Corresponding author. Department of Clinical & Health Psychology, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain. E-mail address: JuanVicente.Luciano@uab.cat (J.V. Luciano). 1 Both authors contributed equally to this paper and should be considered as co-first authors. 2 These authors are joint senior authors. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2023.05.001 Received 15 June 2022; Received in revised form 2 May 2023; Accepted 3 May 2023 Available online 4 May 2023 2212-1447/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association for Contextual Behavioral Science. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 depression (Bai et al., 2020), anxiety (Bluett et al., 2014), psychosis the ELS have been scarcely analyzed in languages other than English. (Tonarelli et al., 2016), or chronic pain (Feliu-Soler et al., 2018). Ac­ cording to this approach, psychological inflexibility is a core construct 1.2. The engaged living scale that encompasses a psychopathological process underlying the symp­ tomatology of a broad range of mental disorders (Levin et al., 2014). The The ELS (Trompetter et al., 2013) is a 16-item scale with a bifactor purpose of ACT is to enhance the opposite transdiagnostic process (i.e., structure, that is, items loaded both in their respective factor (Valued psychological flexibility), which involves “the ability to contact the Living [VL] or Life Fulfillment [LF]) and in a general factor of engaged present moment more fully as a conscious human being, and to change living. The factor VL refers to acknowledging and comprehending one’s or persist in behavior when doing so serves valued ends” (Hayes et al., personal values and behave in accordance to those values. The LF factor 2006, p. 7). refers to experiencing a sense of fulfilment in life as a result of recog­ Psychological flexibility was originally established through six pro­ nizing and adhering to personal values. Although Barrett et al. (2019) cesses (the Hexaflex model; Hayes et al., 1999): (a) acceptance, (b) showed that the ELS is one of the values-based psychometric tools within defusion, (c) present moment attention, (d) self as context, (e) values ACT with strongest psychometric properties, the factor structure of the clarity, and (f) committed action. Each process is associated to all the ELS had only been previously studied in a chronic pain sample, thus others, but they are also related in pairs defining three process dyads or limiting its validity for non-clinical samples. Further, as far as we know, response styles (the Triflex model; Hayes et al., 2012): (a) the open no psychometric assessment studies have been published after the response style collects the pair of acceptance and defusion components original one, except for a Portuguese validation study (Trindade et al., and refers to a nonjudging, curious, and learning attitude towards the 2016). In this study, the bifactor model was supported after adjusting for direct experiences while letting undesired private events go; (b) the modification indices. In addition, Trindade et al. (2016) reduced the centered response style involves present moment awareness and self as scale to 9 items to achieve a better fit. This study neither re-tested the context processes and is defined by being conscious and centered in the single factor nor tried to test other alternative factor models (e.g., a psychological, physical, and social aspects of the present; and (c) the hierarchical two-factor model). The authors only tested the correlated engaged response style includes values clarity and committed action two-factor model proposed by Trompetter et al. (2013). Moreover, components. It also refers to the process of performing persistent actions Cronbach’s α was estimated as an index of internal consistency. The to achieve short-term goals that are aligned with values, which are authors should have computed coefficient omega and omega hierar­ intangible and dynamic goals. As can be seen below, different measures chical, which are highly recommended for estimating with accuracy the have been developed to assess each of these processes. reliability of bifactor models (Garcia-Garzon et al., 2021). Finally, regarding convergent and discriminant validity of the ELS, engaged 1.1. The hexaflex assessment living (ELS-total scale) was positively associated with psychological flexibility, mindfulness facets (except for nonjudging that was no sta­ This theoretical model can be taken as framework for scale devel­ tistically significant), health-related quality of life, mental well-being, opment and assessment of the processes involved in ACT. However, most extraversion, and individual’s level of contact with values, as well as research on ACT processes has been based on the different versions of negatively associated with psychological inflexibility, cognitive fusion, the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ; Bond et al., 2011; neuroticism, depression, anxiety, stress, and pain disability (Trindade Hayes et al., 2004), which focused on assessing acceptance/experiential et al., 2016; Trompetter et al., 2013). Trompetter et al. (2013) reported avoidance and defusion/cognitive fusion (i.e., the open response style). that VL was positively associated with mindfulness facets (except for Moreover, the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ; Baer et al., nonjudging) and well-being as well as negatively associated with psy­ 2006) is a widely used self-report measure for assessing mindfulness and chological inflexibility, pain interference, anxiety, and depression. acceptance processes, related to the open and centered response styles. Furthermore, LF was positively associated with two mindfulness facets Furthermore, recent efforts have been made to develop self-report (acting with awareness and nonreacting) and well-being and negatively measures that assess all psychological flexibility skills at once, such as associated with psychological inflexibility, pain interference, anxiety, the Psy-Flex (Gloster et al., 2021) and the Multidimensional Psycho­ depression, and pain disability (Trompetter et al., 2013). As generally logical Flexibility Inventory (Rolffs et al., 2018; Seidler et al., 2020). done, convergent and discriminant validity was assessed by calculating Focusing specifically on engaged response style, some authors have Pearson’s correlation coefficients (Trindade et al., 2016; Trompetter indicated that the unique contribution of values clarity and committed et al., 2013). However, as noted below, the network analysis approach action on ACT outcomes is relatively understudied and misunderstood might add significant information about the association between (Barrett et al., 2019; McCracken et al., 2015). This issue is notable, as in engaged living and other relevant variables. ACT all psychotherapeutic techniques are subordinated to supporting the client live in consonance with the client’s values. That is, valued 1.3. A new psychometric approach: Network analysis living itself is even considered as a main outcome of ACT (Hayes et al., 2012). In the last systematic review on the psychometric quality of the Network analysis is a set of integrated statistical techniques that can available values instruments, Barrett et al. (2019) concluded that the simultaneously analyze many variables and investigate their role as Valued Living Questionnaire (Wilson et al., 2010), Engaged Living Scale outcome and mediator at the same time (McNally, 2016). This statistical (ELS; Trompetter et al., 2013), Valuing Questionnaire (Smout et al., method provides a network consisting of nodes (variables) and edges 2014), and Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory-values (statistical association). The network is a comprehensive system that subscale (Rolffs et al., 2018) showed the strongest psychometric prop­ summarizes the association between variables and their unique contri­ erties. The ELS, Valuing Questionnaire, and Multidimensional Psycho­ butions to the rest of the system. Thus, it allows to examine complex logical Flexibility Inventory-values subscale are self-report measures relations among multiple variables, simultaneously. Further, re­ that have been developed to assess overall valued living, instead of searchers are recently exploring the potential of this tool to investigate measuring valued living regarding specific life domains. The Valuing validity of self-report measures, such as the Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire has been recently tested in Portuguese (Carvalho et al., Questionnaire (Lecuona et al., 2021), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence 2018), Swedish (Rickardsson et al., 2019), and Spanish (Ruiz et al., Scale (Schmank et al., 2019), the Embodiment Scale (Romano et al., 2022). As well, the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory 2021), or the Sussex-Oxford Compassion Scales (Lucarini et al., 2022). have been translated to multiple languages, such as Italian (Landi et al., In the first two examples, the authors explored and contrasted optimal 2021), French (Grégoire et al., 2020), Mandarin or Japanese (Lin et al., factor solutions of the measures. In the last two cases, network analysis 2020). Meanwhile, as can be seen below, the psychometric properties of was used to deeply investigate convergent and discriminant validity of 267 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 the scales. hierarchical. Thirdly, to explore convergent and discriminant validity of Moreover, it is possible to study a network structure at various time engaged living using network analysis. Finally, to explore the potential points and determine the changes following an intervention when using effect of pilgrimage on ELS factors. Considering previous evidence on longitudinal data (Epskamp et al., 2018; McNally, 2016). This would the dimensionality of the ELS (Trindade et al., 2016; Trompetter et al., allow to distinguish if a behavior or psychological construct works 2013), we expected that the bifactor model would yield better fit to the mainly as an antecedent or consequent within treatment approaches as data than other competing models both in the pilgrims and the general well as which one critically influence others within the intervention. population samples (Hypothesis 1). We also anticipated satisfactory According to Christodoulou et al. (2019), network analysis can reliability for the ELS along with adequate convergent and discriminant contribute to a better understanding of the components of the Hexaflex validity (Hypothesis 2). Concerning it, we expected to determine the model and to an improvement of behavior change within ACT. network structure entailed in this set of variables, to explore changes in Furthermore, other vital experiences foster psychological flexibility the network structure following pilgrimage, and to assess the influence skills as well, e.g., mindfulness and clarity in personal values seem to of the change in engaged living on the rest of variables. In this regard, we improve within pilgrimage (Feliu-Soler et al., 2021; Schnell & Pali, hypothesized that ELS scales would be positively associated to mind­ 2013). Thus, the Hexaflex components can be studied using this new fulness facets, satisfaction with life, subjective happiness, and positive psychometric methodology in other contexts beyond ACT. affect, as well as negatively associated to depression, anxiety, distress, and negative affect within the network (Hypothesis 3). Finally, a sig­ 1.4. Pilgrimage, a way to foster psychological flexibility nificant impact of pilgrimage on ELS factors was expected, with in­ creases in both VL and LF scores (Hypothesis 4). Pilgrimage is a journey to a place that has an important meaning either religiously or secularly (Morinis, 1992). It has been suggested that 2. Methods its common aspects with intensive contemplative practices might explain its effects on psychological processes that operate in 2.1. Participants mindfulness-based interventions (Cheer et al., 2017; Khoury et al., 2017). In addition, it usually implies long-distance walking, an activity The main sample (Sample 1) comprised 752 Spanish pilgrims (60% with psychotherapeutic effects that can lead to reflection on life and women; Mage = 43.27; SDage = 13.07; range: 16–77) of the Way. Among values (Mau et al., 2021, 2023). Modern pilgrims are no longer moti­ them, 307 pilgrimaged on the Way during the timeframe of the current vated by religion, but by secular spiritual aspects (e.g., enjoy solitude, study, of whom 285 answered the post-pilgrimage assessment. Charac­ the feeling of freedom), wanting new experiences and for the outdoor teristics of Sample 1 are shown in Table 1. Regarding the sample of the and physical activities experience (Amaro et al., 2018). In turn, personal general population (Sample 2), it comprised 423 adults (70% women; values have shown a significant role in the transformative effect of Mage = 41.92; SDage = 10.93; range: 18–75). Characteristics of Sample 2 pilgrimage. Notwithstanding the difficulties and discomfort of the are shown in Appendix A. pilgrimage, values related to sense of belonging, sense of accomplish­ ment, warm relationships, and self-fulfillment significantly influence 2.2. Instruments pilgrims’ motives to partake in the journey (Hall et al., 2018; Liutikas, 2017). For instance, the most popular pilgrimage way in Spain is the 2.2.1. Sociodemographics Way of Saint James (“the Way”; “Camino de Santiago”, in Spanish). It An ad-hoc questionnaire collected information about gender, age, receives people from all over the world, being 178,912 pilgrims offi­ marital status, educational level, work status, religion, experience in cially registered during the last year (Pilgrim’s Office, 2021). The way of meditation practice, and if it was (or not) the first-time pilgrimaging in Saint James is considered an exceptional and transformative human experience that induces positive psychological and social effects in the Table 1 individual (Brumec et al., 2022). As commented before, its similarity Sociodemographic data of the sample 1 participants (N = 752). with mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions and the benefits Gender (women): n (%) 451 (60) related to long-distance walking makes pilgrimage in the Way an Age (in years): M (SD) 43.27 (13.07) optimal natural environment for studying the dynamics and psycho­ Marital status: n (%) metrics properties of contextual constructs such as psychological flexi­ Single 273 (36.3) bility, experiential avoidance, mindfulness facets, and engaged living, Married/living with a partner 363 (48.3) among others. Separated/divorced 105 (14) Widowed 11 (1.5) Level of education: n (%) 1.5. Spanish validation of the engaged living scale Primary school 47 (6.3) Secondary school 252 (33.5) In summary, the ELS, in addition to the Valuing Questionnaire and University 453 (60.2) First time to do the Way (yes): n (%) 306 (40.7) the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory-values sub­ Experience in meditation practice (yes): n (%) 144 (19.1) scale, is one of the values-based available tools within ACT with stron­ Work status: n (%) gest psychometric properties. However, no values measure has been Student 65 (8.6) developed or tested in Spanish, except for the recently published Spanish Unemployed 56 (7.4) validation of the Valuing Questionnaire (Ruiz et al., 2022). Moreover, Employed 537 (71.4) Homemaker 13 (1.7) further research is needed to replicate and expand the previous findings On a sick leave 16 (2.1) about the ELS factorial structure, reliability, and validity. The different Retired/pensioner 63 (8.4) aims are discussed. Firstly, to re-test the goodness-of-fit of previous Missing 2 (0.3) factor models and explore the model fit of a hierarchical two-factor Religion: n (%) Catholic 398 (52.9) solution, which has not been previously reported, in a large sample of Protestant 1 (0.1) Spanish pilgrims of the Way, before and after pilgrimage. Then, to re-test Buddhism 12 (1.6) the best-fitting factor solution in a sample of the Spanish general pop­ Hinduism 1 (0.1) ulation to examine the potential generalizability of the results. Secondly, Atheism 126 (16.8) to estimate the reliability of the scale with omega in addition to Cron­ Agnosticism 199 (26.5) Other 15 (2) bach’s alpha and in the bifactor model (if supported) with omega 268 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 the Way. and test–retest reliability (r = 0.72). In addition, good internal consis­ tency was found in the original Spanish validation study (α = 0.81) and 2.2.2. Spanish translation of the ELS in our sample (Time 1: α = 0.85; Time 2: α = 0.86). Permission from the original authors was obtained for translating and validating the ELS (Trompetter et al., 2013). Two Spanish psy­ 2.2.6. Patient Health Questionnaire-Short Form (PHQ-2; Kroenke et al., chologists (XX and XX), who were proficient in English, translated the 2003) original version of the ELS into Spanish. Then, discrepancies were dis­ The PHQ-2 is a 2-item measure assessing the frequency during the cussed, and a single version was back-translated into English by an in­ last 2 weeks of two core depression symptoms (i.e., depressed mood and dependent native English speaker. Again, discrepancies with the original anhedonia). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert-type scale, ranging ELS were discussed and the Spanish version was adapted until it deemed from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). The total score ranges from 0 to similar by consensus to the English version. The definitive version of the 6 with higher scores, indicating higher level of frequency of depression Spanish ELS is available in the supplemental materials section (Appen­ symptoms. The validated Spanish version was used (Cano-Vindel et al., dix B). The ELS was the first measure developed for assessing the 2018). The Spanish PHQ-2 showed evidence of concurrent validity and engaged response style (Trompetter et al., 2013). It is a 16-item good internal consistency (α = 0.86), as they did in our sample (Time 1: self-report measure that contains two subscales: Valued Living (VL; 10 α = 0.78; Time 2: α = 0.77). items; e.g., I have values that give my life more meaning) and Life Fulfillment (LF; 6 items; e.g., I live the way I always intended to live). All items are 2.2.7. General Anxiety Disorder Scale-Short Form (GAD-2; Kroenke et al., scored on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 2007) (completely agree). Scores can be summed for each subscale (ranging The GAD-2 was conceived as an initial screening tool for generalized from 10 to 50 scores in VL subscale; ranging from 6 to 30 scores of LF anxiety and assesses the frequency of two core anxiety symptoms during subscale) and for a total scale (ranging from 16 to 80 scores). last 2 weeks. It comprises 2 items based on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). A total summed score 2.2.3. Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire 15-item version (FFMQ-15; can be calculated, with higher scores indicating a higher frequency of Gu et al., 2016) Feeling nervous, anxious or on edge and Not being able to stop or control The FFMQ-15 assesses five dimensions of dispositional mindfulness: worrying. The total score ranges from 0 to 6. The Spanish GAD-2 was observing, describing, acting with awareness (actaware), nonjudging of used (García-Campayo et al., 2012). It showed high concurrent validity inner experience (nonjudge), and nonreactivity to inner experience and adequate reliability both in the original Spanish adaptation study (α (nonreact). This questionnaire is composed of 15 items (3 for each facet) = 0.88) and in our sample (Time 1: α = 0.84; Time 2: α = 0.82). with five response options ranging from 1 (never or very rarely true) to 5 (very often or always true). The Spanish version was used (Feliu-Soler 2.2.8. Perceived Stress Scale-short form (PSS-4; Cohen et al., 1983) et al., 2021). Sum scores can be calculated for each facet (ranging from 3 The PSS-4 is a short scale designed to assess the degree to which to 15 scores), with higher scores indicating higher mindfulness levels respondents appraise situations as stressful in the last month. It consists (Feliu-Soler et al., 2021). The facet observing was not calculated in of four items (e.g., how often have you felt that you were unable to control accordance with previous literature about the poor association of this the important things in your life?) scored on a Likert-type scale ranging facet with the rest of mindfulness skills in non-meditative samples (Baer, from 0 (never) to 4 (very often). A total score can be obtained by adding 2019; Feliu-Soler et al., 2021; Gu et al., 2016). The Spanish version all item scores that ranges from 0 to 16. The Spanish version was used (Feliu-Soler et al., 2021) showed acceptable internal consistency here (Vallejo et al., 2018). The scores in the original Spanish validation (Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.56 to 0.85) and evidence of construct study showed an adequate internal consistency (α = 0.74) and evidence validity with small to moderate correlations with distress and wellbeing of concurrent validity. Similarly, an adequate internal consistency was measures. Adequate internal consistency was observed in our sample for found in the present work (Time 1: α = 0.74; Time 2: α = 0.74). the subscales (Time 1: α = 0.74 ‒ 0.86; Time 2: α = 0.74 ‒ 0.82), except for nonreact facet (Time 1: α = 0.56; Time 2: α = 0.57). 2.2.9. International positive and negative affect schedule-short form (I- PANAS-SF; Thompson, 2007) 2.2.4. Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener et al., 1985) The I-PANAS-SF comprises two scales: Positive Affect (PA) and The SWLS is a 5-item measure assessing global life satisfaction. Items Negative Affect (NA). PA assesses the extent to which a person feels are scored on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly positive affects like inspired, attentive, and determined, while NA as­ disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). All scores are added to form a total score sesses the extent to which a person experiences forms of subjective that ranges from 5 to 35 scores. Higher scores indicate a higher level of distress like upset, hostile, and afraid. Each scale has 5 Likert-type items wellbeing. The Spanish version was used (Vazquez et al., 2013), which ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Scores for each scale range from 5 was tested in a large representative sample of the Spanish population (n to 25. We used an ad hoc Spanish-language version of the I-PANAS-SF, = 2964). The Spanish SWLS showed good reliability (α = 0.88) and which is in process of validation in an ongoing parallel study of the evidence of construct validity with significant correlations with sub­ present research team. The translated version of the Thompson’s items jective happiness and social support. Good internal consistency was (2007) was extracted from the Spanish validation study of the PANAS observed in our sample (Time 1: α = 0.89; Time 2: α = 0.90). (Sandín et al., 1999). The I-PANAS-SF showed an adequate internal consistency for PA (Time 1: α = 0.84; Time 2: α = 0.87) and NA (Time 1: 2.2.5. Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS; Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999) α = 0.75; Time 2: α = 0.71) scales in our sample. The SHS comprises 4 items based on a 7-point Likert-type scale Table 2 shows mean scores and standard deviations of the partici­ ranging from 1 to 7. It was designed to assess global subjective happi­ pants in the study measures. ness. A total mean score can be calculated, with higher scores indicating a higher level of perceived happiness. The Spanish version was used 2.3. Procedure (Extremera & Fernández-Berrocal, 2014). Its psychometric properties were evaluated in a large and representative sample of the Spanish The study was approved by the Ethics Committee at the XX (XX) and population, including high school students, college students, and com­ complied with the Declaration of Helsinki. It was also pre-registered munity adult participants. The Spanish SHS showed adequate construct (XXX). No remuneration was offered for participating in this research. validity (with positive correlations with the SWLS scores and negative The dataset stemmed from the “Ultreya” project, an online longitudinal correlations with depression and anxiety symptomatology measures) study that evaluated the impact of the pilgrimage on the Way of Saint 269 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 Table 2 data for factor analysis, the Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin’s Measure of Sampling Mean scores (standard deviations) of the participants in the study measures. Adequacy (Kaiser, 1974) was computed. Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin’s scores Study measures Time 1 (n = 752) Time 2 (n = 285) above 0.70 are considered adequate. The Bartlett’s test of Sphericity (Barlett, 1954) was also computed to examine the extent to which the FFMQ-Describing (3-15) 10.64 (2.63) 11.04 (2.57) FFMQ-Actaware (3-15) 10.25 (2.57) 10.54 (2.38) correlation matrices departed from orthogonality. To make our results in FFMQ-Nonjudge (3-15) 11.47 (2.95) 12.09 (2.53) this exploratory analysis comparable with those originally reported by FFMQ-Nonreact (3-15) 9.05 (2.59) 9.76 (2.51) Trompetter et al. (2013), an oblique (oblimin) rotation was used to SWLS (5-35) 22.74 (6.70) 25.03 (6.24) explore the underlying structure of the scale. The following set of rules SHS (1–7) 5.08 (1.21) 5.47 (1.06) PHQ-2 (0–6) 1.25 (1.46) 0.57 (1.06) helped to determine the optimal number of factors to retain (Tabachnick GAD-2 (0–6) 1.46 (1.58) 0.77 (1.20) & Fidell, 2007): the Cattell’s scree test (inspection of a plot of the ei­ PSS-4 (0–16) 4.96 (3.04) 4.14 (2.92) genvalues for breaks or discontinuities), and Monte Carlo Parallel I-PANAS–SF–Negative Affect (5-25) 8.56 (3.09) 6.91 (2.23) Analysis (comparison of the present eigenvalues with those obtained in I-PANAS–SF–Positive Affect (5-25) 16.82 (3.90) 18.98 (3.71) 100 sets of random data of the same size as our pilgrims’ data). Note. FFMQ = Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire-15; SWLS = Satisfaction Then, Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFAs) with Maximum Likeli­ with Life Scale; SHS = Subjective Happiness Scale; PHQ-2 = Patient Health hood Robust estimation method were conducted for assessing dimen­ Questionnaire-Short Form; GAD-2 = General Anxiety Disorder Scale-Short sionality, as proposed by Trompetter et al. (2013). The bifactor model of Form; PSS-4 = Perceived Stress Scale. the ELS (valued living, life fulfillment, and a general factor) was tested to replicate Trompetter et al. (2013). Additionally, a one-factor model with James on mental health and wellbeing (www.estudiocamino.org). All all items loading on one latent factor, a correlated two-factor model with data were collected through a web-based platform (www.surveym 10 items loading on valued living factor and 6 items on the life fulfill­ onkey.com) between May 2017 and May 2020 and were partially ment factor, and a hierarchical two-factor model including an over­ analyzed for the XXXXX. arching engaged living factor were tested. All models were calculated Regarding data collection procedure, a link to the Ultreya website with and without the correlated residuals between items 1 and 3, 4 and was posted and shared across social networks, specialized websites, 7, 6 and 7, 11 and 15, and 14 and 16 that Trindade et al. (2016) pro­ pilgrim associations, and hostels. Participants voluntarily gave their posed in their psychometric study using pre- and post-pilgrimage data, i. written informed consent to take part in the study and gave permission e., Time 1 and Time 2, respectively. Finally, the best-fitting factor so­ to analyze their data in subsequent studies. The initial study sample lution of the ELS was re-tested in a Spanish sample of the general pop­ included 2013 individuals who were aimed at doing the Way of Saint ulation from an ongoing parallel study (Sample 2). James, agreed to participate. Only Spanish-native speakers with Spanish As pointed out by Herrero (2010), rules of thumb cut-off criteria for nationality who completed all ELS items at baseline evaluation were testing the fit of CFA models can be arbitrary and they should not be retained (Time 1; n = 752). Among them, those who pilgrimaged on the used as absolute universally applied rules for assessing fit. Consequently, Way during the timeframe of this study and answered the post- to test the fit of our proposed models, the next indices were calculated pilgrimage assessment (Time 2; n = 285) comprised the post- and interpreted using conservative and liberal cut-offs (Hu & Bentler, pilgrimage sample. Additionally, data on the ELS from participants in 1999; Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003): the comparative fit index (CFI) an ongoing study within our research team about the association among and the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) should be close to or greater than 0.90 meditation practice, mindfulness, self-compassion, and engaged living or 0.95, the root mean square error approximation (RMSEA) should be in the general population were collected (XXXX, 2014). equal or less than 0.06 or 0.10, and the standarized root mean square residual (SRMR) should be less than 0.05 or 0.10. A practical improve­ 2.4. The Way of Saint James ment in model-fit approach was used to compare the models (difference of 0.01 or greater in TLI; Vandenberg & Lance, 2000). The Way of St. James involves the pilgrimage to the Cathedral of Pearson correlations and network analysis were conducted to Santiago de Compostela (Galicia, Spain), the legendary site of the re­ investigate convergent and discriminant validity. First, Pearson corre­ mains of Saint James. It is the most ancient route in Europe with a lations between the ELS scores and the other related study measures network of paths starting from different locations in Spain and abroad were calculated. The strength of the associations was interpreted ac­ (e.g., France, the United Kingdom or Italy). The most common route is cording to Cohen’s guidelines (Cohen, 1988): r = 0.10-0.29 (small); r = Camino Francés, around 800 km long path (from Saint-Jean-Pied-de-Port 0.30-0.49 (medium); r = 0.50-1 (large). Regarding network analysis, all in France) that takes about 4–5 weeks of walking. Unlike centuries ago, variables (nodes) were treated as numeric and continuous. The estima­ it is not only a religious phenomenon but also a cultural one and a tion method was the Extended Bayesian Information Criterion Graphical growth experience. Usually, pilgrims collect stamps along their route Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (EBICglasso), which from the places they pass through in order to get an official certificate of outlines the unique associations between variable pairs (edges) with pilgrimage (the “Compostela” in Spanish). The minimum distance regularized partial correlations. As such, edges represent regularized required for achieve it is 100 km on foot or horseback, or the last 200 km partial correlation coefficients, corresponding each one to the associa­ by bicycle (Pilgrim’s Office, n.d.)”. Most pilgrims are of Spanish na­ tion between two variables while all other linear relationships have been tionality, but the “Compostela” is generally issued to pilgrims from accounted for. Meanwhile, spurious edges are set to zero (i.e., regular­ almost two hundred countries each year. ized), thus improving interpretability of the network (Chen & Chen, 2008; Epskamp et al., 2018; Tibshirani, 1996). The thickness of the 2.5. Statistical analyses edges represents the strength of the association between variables. A pair of networks were estimated using Time 1 and 2 data. Descriptive statistics (mean, SD, range, skewness, and kurtosis) were The Fruchterman-Reingold algorithm was used to plot the networks. computed for all variables. In addition, corrected item-total correlations This procedure positions the nodes based on the strength of the con­ (rtot) were calculated for items in the ELS to examine how each item nections between them. Then, the centrality for each node was esti­ contributed to the overall scale. Coefficients lower than 0.30 were mated with three measures (Christodoulou et al., 2019; McNally, 2016): considered an indication of an item measuring something different from betweenness, closeness, and degree. The first one is based on the number the scale as a whole (DeVellis, 1991). of times a node is found in the shortest connection between two other First, we made use of pilgrims’ ELS scores for an exploratory nodes, that is, the higher the betweenness of a node, the higher the maximum likelihood factor analysis. To know the suitability of the ELS activation of other nodes as consequence of that node. Another 270 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 centrality index is closeness, which is the average distance of a node to cross-validating the best-fitting factor solution of the ELS according to all other ones in the network. Thus, the higher the closeness of a node, the CFA. Descriptive and correlation analyses were performed with SPSS the higher relevance of that node in the network. Finally, how many v.26, CFA with MPlus v.7, and network analysis with JASP 0.16. edges are connected to a node is indicated by the degree. Again, the higher the degree of a node, the more central is that node in the network. 3. Results Change scores for all variables in the network were computed. Then, Pearson correlations between change scores of each of the variables and 3.1. Item analysis a summed change score for the remainder of them, as well as change in valued living and life fulfilment separately were calculated. This was an Preliminary analyses showed that the items scores of the ELS were indication of how changes in each variable were related to changes in normally distributed (see skewness and kurtosis values in Table 3). In the full network (Robinaugh et al., 2016; Åkerblom et al., 2021). addition, the corrected item-total correlation coefficients for the sub­ The internal consistency of all scales used in this research was scales were all greater than 0.30, thus suggesting good scale determined by calculating Cronbach’s α. Regarding the internal con­ homogeneity. sistency of the ELS, Cronbach’s α and McDonald’s ω were calculated. Coefficients equal or above 0.70 indicated adequate internal consistency (DeVellis, 1991). Regarding to sensitivity to change, a paired-samples 3.2. Construct validity t-test was conducted to evaluate the impact of the Way on pilgrims’ valued living and life fulfillment scores. Cohen’s d was calculated for Regarding the exploratory factor analysis, Table 3 presents the measuring the effect size. It was interpreted as follows (Cohen, 1988): pattern coefficients and structure coefficients for the items of the ELS. 0.2 (small effect), 0.5 (medium effect), and 0.8 (large effect). The Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin’s measure yielded a coefficient of 0.93, which is Last, as supplementary analysis, an independent-samples t-test was indicative of satisfactory sampling adequacy. The Bartlett’s test of conducted to compare the ELS baseline mean scores for those going on sphericity produced a value of 8241.07 (p < .001), indicating that the the pilgrimage (n = 285) vs those who were not (n = 467) during the correlation matrix was suitable for exploratory factor analysis. An in­ timeframe of this study (Appendix C). Moreover, Pearson correlation spection of the scree plot and the Monte Carlo Parallel Analysis sug­ was used to investigate the relationship between all measured variables gested that 2 factors may be sufficient to capture the essence of the (Appendix D). Finally, paired-samples t-test was conducted to explore Spanish ELS. The 2-factor solution accounted for 51% and 9.24% of the pre-post changes in dispositional mindfulness, global life satisfaction, total variance, respectively. These two factors were strongly correlated subjective happiness, depression symptoms, anxiety-worry, perceived (r = 0.73) and several items cross-loaded (e.g., items 1, 5, 8, and 9). stress, positive affect, and negative affect scores (Appendix E). Regarding the CFA using Maximum Likelihood Robust estimation All analyses were conducted on Sample 1. Sample 2 was only used for method, the fit indices for the factor models of the ELS are shown in Table 4. The results showed that neither the original bifactor model Table 3 Descriptive data, patter coefficients, and structure coefficients for the two-factor solution from exploratory factor analysis. ELS items M (SD) S K rtot Pattern coefficients Structure coefficients VL LF VL LF 1. I have values that give my life more meaning. 4.29 (0.78) − 1.23 2.26 .54 .35 .15 .45 .40 Tengo valores que dan a mi vida un mayor significado. 2. I know what motivates me in life. 4.08 (0.84) − 1.03 1.47 .71 .66 .05 .69 .53 Sé qué es lo que me motiva en la vida. 3. I believe that I’ve found important values to live according to. 4.15 (0.79) − .85 .86 .68 .48 .17 .61 .52 Creo que he encontrado valores importantes que guían mi vida. 4. I know exactly what I want to do with my life. 3.54 (1.02) − .53 − .10 .74 .94 − .08 .88 .60 Sé exactamente lo que quiero hacer con mi vida. 5. I make choices based on my values, even if it is stressful. 3.94 (0.84) − .70 .47 .65 .46 .18 .60 .52 Tomo decisiones basadas en mis valores, aunque me resulte difícil. 6. I know how I want to live my life. 3.84 (0.94) − .86 .68 .77 .90 − .04 .87 .62 Sé cómo quiero vivir mi vida. 7. I know what I want to do with my life. 3.71 (0.98) − .65 .11 .75 1.00 − .14 .90 .60 Sé lo que quiero hacer con mi vida. 8. I believe that my values are really reflected in my behaviour. 4.06 (0.82) − .91 1.11 .61 .35 .26 .53 .51 Creo que mis valores se reflejan claramente en mi comportamiento. 9. I believe that how I behave fits in with my personal wants and desires. 3.88 (0.88) − .84 .69 .69 .40 .33 .64 .62 Creo que mi manera de comportarme responde a lo que quiero y deseo. 10. My emotions don’t hold me back from doing what’s important to me. 3.55 (1.01) − .60 − .18 .59 .27 .44 .59 .63 Mis emociones no me impiden hacer lo que es importante para mí. 11. I live the way I always intended to live. 3.21 (0.98) − .26 − .43 .76 .03 .79 .61 .81 Vivo como siempre he querido vivir. 12. I am satisfied with how I live my life. 3.55 (1.01) − .60 − .14 .77 − .04 .87 .59 .84 Me siento satisfecho con la manera que vivo. 13. Nothing can stop me from doing something that’s important to me. 3.64 (0.99) − .49 − .26 .49 .22 .34 .47 .50 Nada puede detenerme a la hora de hacer algo que es importante para mí. 14. I believe that I am living life to the full right now. 3.42 (1.07) − .48 − .33 .81 − .06 .92 .61 .87 Creo que estoy viviendo la vida con plenitud ahora mismo. 15. I make time for the things that I consider important. 3.82 (0.93) − .83 .44 .60 .10 .54 .49 .61 Encuentro tiempo para las cosas que considero importantes. 16. I feel that I am living a full life. 3.38 (1.04) − .37 − .43 .83 − .03 .92 .64 .90 Siento que estoy viviendo una vida plena. Note. n = 752. ELS = Engaged Living Scale; VL = Valued Living (Items 1–10); LF = Life Fulfillment (Items 11–16); M = mean; SD = Standard Deviation; S = Skewness; K = Kurtosis. rtot = corrected item-total correlations. Items scores can range from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). Pattern coefficients represent the unique association between the item and the factor while controlling for the other factor. Structure coefficients represent correlations between the item and the factor. 271 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 Table 4 Fit indices for Engaged Living Scales models. Time Model χ2*** df CFI TLI RMSEA [90% CI] SRMR Time 1 One-factor 1735.240 104 .722 .680 .144 [.138, .150] .079 One-factor (+θ1-3, θ4-7, θ6-7, θ11-15, θ14-16 freea) 1014.680 99 .844 .811 .111 [.105, .117] .068 Correlated Two-factor 1086.240 103 .833 .805 .113 [.107, .119] .072 n = 752 Correlated Two-factor (+θ1-3, θ4-7, θ6-7, θ11-15, θ14-16 freea) 632.378 98 .909 .889 .085 [.079, .092] .055 Bifactor 1063.123 91 .835 .782 .119 [.113, .126] .434 Time 2 One-factor 709.710 104 .764 .728 .143 [.133, .153] .075 One-factor (+θ1-3, θ4-7, θ6-7, θ11-15, θ14-16 freea) 413.706 99 .877 .851 .106 [.095, .116] .064 Correlated Two-factor 496.740 103 .847 .821 .116 [.106, .126] .067 n = 285 Correlated Two-factor (+θ1-3, θ4-7, θ6-7, θ11-15, θ14-16 freea) 303.804 98 .920 .902 .086 [.075, .097] .055 Bifactor 510.523 91 .836 .784 .127 [.117, .138] .567 Note. χ2 (df) = chi-square (degrees of freedom); CFI = Comparative Fit Index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index; RMSEA = root mean square error approximation; 90% CI = 90% confidence interval of the RMSEA; SRMR = standarized root mean square residual. The chosen estimator was Maximum Likelihood Robust. Indices for the hi­ erarchical two-factor and bifactor with correlated residuals models are not shown because the Mplus model did not converge. p < .001. a Correlated residuals among items as in Trindade et al. (2016). proposed by Trompetter et al. (2013) nor the bifactor model with Trindade et al. (2016): CFI = 0.91; TLI = 0.89; RMSEA = 0.09 with CI modification indices proposed by Trindade et al. (2016) were supported. 90% [0.08, 0.09]; SRMR = 0.06. As well, it showed a good fit at Time 2 The best-fitting model at Time 1 (pre-test) was the correlated two-factor (post-test). The alternative models were not supported. Finally, the solution with the five pairs of correlated error terms proposed by correlated two-factor solution with the five pairs of correlated error Fig. 1. Two-factor Model of the Engaged Living Scale (ELS) obtained in the CFA. 272 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 terms was supported when it was computed in an independent sample of all the edge weights (i.e., strength of the associations between nodes from the general population (Sample 2): CFI = 0.91; TLI = 0.89; RMSEA in the network) are included as Supplemental Material (Appendix G). = 0.09 with CI 90% [0.08, 0.10]; SRMR = 0.06. Fig. 1 shows the stan­ Attending to the centrality measures (see Fig. 3), perceived stress was dardized estimates of this factor model. All the estimated loadings were the most central node of the network before and after pilgrimage, only significant (p < .001). topped by life fulfillment in number of interconnections (i.e., degree). Pearson correlations indicated that valued living and life fulfillment Overall, valued living showed an increase in centrality after pilgrimage. had a positive relationship with dispositional mindfulness (describe, In contrast, valued living lost in connections and number of proximities actaware, nonjudge, and nonreact facets), satisfaction with life, sub­ to other nodes (i.e., betweenness and closeness, respectively). jective happiness, and positive affect. In contrast, there was a negative correlation between valued living and life fulfillment and depression, 3.3. Pre-to-post-pilgrimage change anxiety-worry, perceived stress, and negative affect. Overall, the asso­ ciations were significant at the p < .001 level (except for nonreact, p < Table 5 shows the Pearson correlations between pre-to post- .01) and generally their strength was medium to large (r ≥ 0.30). See pilgrimage change in each of the nodes and a summed change score for Appendix F in the Supplemental Materials for more details. the remainder of the nodes, as well as changes in valued living and life Regarding network analysis, Fig. 2 shows the pre- and post- fulfillment separately. Changes in satisfaction with life scores were most pilgrimage networks including all variables in the study. As can be strongly associated with changes in the remainder of the nodes followed seen, valued living scores were positively associated to positive affect, by changes in life fulfillment, subjective happiness, and valued living. In subjective happiness, and three mindfulness facets (nonjudge, actaware, contrast, changes in Nonjudge, anxiety-worry, Describing, and Nonreact and describe) scores before pilgrimage. After pilgrimage, those associ­ were least strongly associated with changes in the network. Moreover, ations were maintained except for that with nonjudge. Meanwhile, life changes in both valued living and life fulfillment were strongly associ­ fulfillment scores were positively associated to satisfaction with life, ated to changes in subjective happiness. Meanwhile, anxiety-worry, positive affect, and subjective happiness scores, as well as negatively Describing, and Nonreact were least strongly associated with valued associated to perceived stress and negative affect scores before living and life fulfillment. pilgrimage. After pilgrimage, life fulfillment scores maintained the positive association with those scores, to which were added nonjudge 3.4. Reliability analyses and nonreact (mindfulness facets). Moreover, life fulfillment was only negatively associated to depression scores after the pilgrimage. Internal consistency of the ELS was adequate with Cronbach’s α Overall, the nodes valued living, life fulfillment, satisfaction with values greater than 0.70: pre-test: αValued Living = 0.91; αLife Fulfillment = life, and subjective happiness clustered together, thus forming a highly 0.89; post-test: αValued Living = 0.91; αLife Fulfillment = 0.90. Similarly, correlated colony of adaptative variables. Within this colony, satisfac­ McDonald’s ω values indicated a good internal consistency: pre-test: ω tion with life could be considered as a bridging variable that presented Valued Living = 0.91; ω Life Fulfillment = 0.90; post-test: ω Valued Living = 0.92; the strongest inverse association with the perceived stress node, which ω Life Fulfillment = 0.91. was the most central psychopathological node in the networks. Both networks showed that the exerted influence of the ELS factors on the 3.5. Sensitivity to change perceived stress node was mediated by subjective happiness and satis­ faction with life (or vice versa) and intensified after pilgrimage. Simi­ The paired-samples t-tests showed that there was a statistically sig­ larly, positive affect seemed to mediate the relation of valued living and nificant increase in valued living scores from Time 1 (M = 38.74; SD = life fulfillment with depressive symptoms. The tables showing the values 6.34) to Time 2 (M = 40.63; SD = 6.05): t (284) = − 6.23, p < .001, d = Fig. 2. Pre- and Post-pilgrimage Networks. Note. Blue and red lines indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively. The thickness of the edges indicates the magnitude of the association between two nodes. Thus, the higher strength between two nodes, the higher probability of that the activation of a node will be followed by the other. VL = Valued Living; LF = Life Fulfillment; SWLS = Satisfaction with Life Scale; SHS = Subjective Happiness Scale; ELS = Engaged Living Scale; PSS = Perceived Stress Scale; NA = Negative Affect; PHQ = Patient Health Questionnaire-Short Form; PA = Positive Affect; FFMQ-15 = Five Facets Mindfulness Ques­ tionnaire 15-item version; GAD = General Anxiety Disorder Scale-Short Form; Actaware = acting with awareness; Nonjudge = nonjudging of inner experience; Nonreact = nonreactivity to inner experience. 273 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 Fig. 3. Centrality Measures for the Factor Network. Note. VL = Valued Living; LF = Life Fulfillment; SWLS = Satisfaction with Life Scale; SHS = Subjective Happiness Scale; PSS = Perceived Stress Scale; NA = Negative Affect; PHQ = Patient Health Questionnaire-Short Form; PA = Positive Affect; GAD = General Anxiety Disorder Scale-Short Form; Actaware = acting with awareness; Nonjudge = nonjudging of inner experience; Nonreact = nonreactivity to inner experience. Table 5 Pearson Correlations Between Pre- and Post-pilgrimage Change (Δ) in each of the Nodes and the Summed Change Score in the Remainder of the Nodes, Valued Living, and Life Fulfillment. Variable Δ Other network nodesa Ranking of importance Δ Valued Livingb Ranking of importance Δ Life Fulfillmentc Ranking of importance Δ SWLS .590 1 .345 4 .516 3 Δ Life Fulfillment .577 2 .620 1 – – Δ SHS .529 3 .477 2 .563 2 Δ Valued Living .503 4 – – .620 1 Δ PSS − .396 5 − .335 6 − .303 7 Δ NA − .324 6 − .258 9 − .298 8 Δ PHQ − .314 7 − .311 7 − .394 4 Δ PA .267 8 .336 5 .367 5 Δ Actaware .246 9 .272 8 .238 10 Δ Nonjudge .231 10 .379 3 .322 6 Δ GAD − .201 11 − .182 10 − .291 9 Δ Describing .184 12 .149 11 .163 11 Δ Nonreact .042 13 .123 12 .099 12 Note. SWLS = Satisfaction with Life Scale; SHS = Subjective Happiness Scale; PSS = Perceived Stress Scale; NA = Negative Affect; PHQ = Patient Health Questionnaire- Short Form; PA = Positive Affect; GAD = General Anxiety Disorder Scale-Short Form; Actaware = acting with awareness; Nonjudge = nonjudging of inner experience; Nonreact = nonreactivity to inner experience. a All correlations were significant at the p < .001 level, except for Describe (p = .001) and Nonreact (p = .467). b All correlations were significant at the p < .001 level, except for Describe (p = .005), and Nonreact (p = .094). c All correlations were significant at the p < .001 level, except for Describe (p = .004) and Nonreact (p = .094). 0.37 with CI 95% [0.25, 0.49]; as well as an increase in life fulfillment 4. Discussion scores from Time 1 (M = 21.11; SD = 4.70) to Time 2 (M = 22.91; SD = 4.41): t (284) = − 8.16, p < .001, d = 0.48 with CI 95% [0.36, 0.61]. The The purpose of the current study was to examine the psychometric Cohen’s d indicated a medium effect size for both ELS factors. properties of the Spanish version of the ELS, the only existing specific 274 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 process measure of the engaged response style, in a large sample of Regarding the impact of pilgrimage on engaged living, our results Spanish pilgrims. Our first aim was to examine its factorial structure. showed that this experience had a significant impact on the ability to The exploratory factor analysis yielded two factors but with many cross- recognize personal values, behave congruently to them, and the positive loadings, which generates some uncertainty about the dimensionality. perception of living according to them. Similarly, Feliu-Soler et al. However, a correlated two-factor structure (though with five pairs of (2021) found that going on the Way had a significant effect on mind­ correlated error terms) showed an adequate goodness of fit, both in the fulness skills, another process of psychological flexibility. As only these pilgrims and the general population (cross-validation sample). Although studies have explored the effectiveness of pilgrimage on these processes the bifactor model showed the best model fit in the original validation of psychological flexibility, more research is needed to confirm and study (Trompetter et al., 2013), it did not provide an adequate model fit describe in detail the role of psychological flexibility in this special kind neither in the Portuguese validation (Trindade et al., 2016) nor in this of journeys. Doing pilgrimage is an opportunity to reflect on our own study (with and without the modifications suggested by Trindade et al., lives, bringing increased awareness and personal insight about what 2016). Moreover, the one-factor and hierarchical two-factor structures matters in each pilgrim life. In this regard, one of the crucial aspects were not supported. From a theoretical point-of-view, it should be noted affected by this self-discovery journey would be clarity in personal that valued living comprised values clarity and committed action, the values and meaning (Schnell & Pali, 2013). Pilgrims find out who they two components of the engaged response style (Trompetter et al., 2013). really are and can contemplate about things they have done in the past Further, although not strictly part of the triflex model set out by Hayes from another perspective. Traditionally, pilgrimage is considered a et al. (2012), life fulfillment was intended as a complementary construct valuable experience through which people learn lessons for life. to the engaged living process, thus justifying those items from both A limitation of this study is the absence of a general measure of factors loaded on a general dimension too (Trompetter et al., 2013). The psychological flexibility in the assessment protocol. This would have lack of conclusiveness about a general underlying factor deserves enriched the construct validity analyses by making possible investigate additional consideration, though what seems evident is the presence of the convergence between the Spanish ELS and that measure (e.g., Psy- the two well-differentiated factors; valued living and life fulfillment. Flex or Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory), as Thus, we suggest that the Spanish version of the ELS should be scored awareness of values and commitment to values in daily life is an using only the two subscale scores. important part of psychological flexibility. In addition, the poor internal The second aim was to estimate the reliability of the Spanish version consistency of the mindfulness facet “nonreactivity to inner experience” of the ELS. It was found that the valued living and life fulfillment sub- hinders its interpretation within correlation analyses. Moreover, a scales showed good internal consistencies, with similar alpha values to Spanish-language version of the I-PANAS-SF was used. Although it those obtained in the English and Portuguese versions (Trindade et al., showed apparently acceptable reliability here, the validity of this 2016; Trompetter et al., 2013). In that sense, it is noteworthy that we Spanish-language version remains to be assessed and will be the subject calculated not only Cronbach’s alpha, but also McDonald’s omega of subsequent research. Furthermore, the online assessment of partici­ values following recent recommendations (e.g., Hayes & Coutts, 2020; pants might have altered the results because of a self-selection bias McNeish, 2018). (Wright, 2005). Also, a considerable part of the initial sample did not The third and fourth aims were to determine construct validity of the answer the post-pilgrimage assessment. Thus, the post-pilgrimage sam­ ELS with network analysis, the network structure entailed in the present ple might not be representative of the initial sample. As well, the pe­ set of variables, to explore changes in the network structure following culiarities of the main sample (pilgrims) might hinder the pilgrimage, and to assess the influence of the change in valued living and generalizability of the results. However, we did replicate the factor life fulfillment on the rest of variables. In terms of construct validity, our analysis results in an independent sample to partially overcome this data showed a positive association of valued living and life fulfillment limitation. Furthermore, the influence of other confounding variables with satisfaction with life, subjective happiness, positive affect, and not included in this study might explain the post-pilgrimage changes mindfulness skills. Besides, ELS factors were negatively associated to such as the duration of the trip for each participant or the social life psychopathology levels and negative affect. These patterns of associa­ during the trip. In fact, the absence of a control group and random tions were going in the expected direction and were coherent to those allocation precluded the possibility of casual inferences. Finally, the described in previous literature (Trindade et al., 2016; Trompetter et al., translation and adaptation of the instrument could have benefited from 2013). Furthermore, network analysis allowed us to investigate these considering extra methodological aspects in accordance with specialized interactions in depth by considering all variables at once in two tem­ guidelines (e.g., Sousa & Rojjanasrirat, 2011), such as producing two poral moments: before and after participants went on pilgrimage to the independent translations both in the forward- and back-translation steps Way. From this novel procedure, it was concluded that the main effect of and counting with a team of independent translators. However, we engaged living and life fulfillment on distress is apparently exerted received some supervision from the developers of the ELS and also had through their effect on subjective happiness and satisfaction with life. It sessions of interactive discussion when adapting the ELS to Spanish should be mentioned that network analysis does not allow inferences culture. In addition, it is important to say that even the stricter forms of about causation, so it should be also considered an effect from distress to translation methodology are far from being perfect and have some engaged living through satisfaction with life and subjective happiness. drawbacks very well described by van de Vijver and Leung (1997). For Moreover, participants significantly increased their levels of engaged instance, it is more focused on the semantics and less to connotations, living and life fulfillment after pilgrimage, that together with the naturalness, and comprehensibility than rounds of agreement among changes in subjective happiness and satisfaction with life, were the most experts. influential and explicative variables in the networks. These results are in To conclude, the Spanish ELS is a reliable and valid self-report line with previous findings about the positive association of psycho­ measure of two closely related variables of high relevance within the logical flexibility with well-being (e.g., Howell & Demuynck, 2021) and ACT model of psychological flexibility, which are valued living and life satisfaction with life (e.g., Graham et al., 2016; Kashdan et al., 2020). fulfillment. Regarding scoring, the respective two subscales should be However, Lucas and Moore (2020) found that the significant association used separately, whereas computation of a total score seems not war­ between psychological flexibility and satisfaction with life was mediated ranted. In fact, it is necessary to highlight that the ELS is the only by mental health outcomes (anxiety, depression, and social func­ existing specific measure of the engaged response style. Furthermore, in tioning). On the contrary, our data showed that the only direct associ­ a network approach to a large sample of Spanish pilgrims, valued living ation between engaged living processes and psychopathology was and life fulfillment were found to be clustered with satisfaction with life, mirrored by a weak negative association between life fulfillment and and subjective happiness were found to have a strong influence on the distress before pilgrimage. change of psychopathology, affect, and mindfulness variables. 275 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 Declaration of conflicts of interest Christodoulou, A., Michaelides, M., & Karekla, M. (2019). Network analysis: A new psychometric approach to examine the underlying ACT model components. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 12, 285–289. None. Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Washington: American Psychological Association. Acknowledgements Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396. DeVellis, R. (1991). Scale development. Newbury, CA: Sage. JN has a research contract from the Institute of Health Carlos III Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsem, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life (ISCIII; ICI20/00080). AC-C has a FI predoctoral contract from AGAUR scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. Epskamp, S., Borsboom, D., & Fried, E. I. (2018). Estimating psychological networks and (FI_B/00216). JPS-M has a PFIS predoctoral contract from the ISCIII their accuracy: A tutorial paper. Behavior Research Methods, 50(1), 195–212. (FI20/00034). JMM has a “Miguel Servet” contract from the ISCIII Extremera, N., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2014). The subjective happiness scale: (CP21/00080). AF-S acknowledges the funding from the Serra Húnter Translation and preliminary psychometric evaluation of a Spanish version. Social Indicators Research, 119, 473–481. program (Generalitat de Catalunya; reference number UAB-LE-8015). Feliu-Soler, A., Montesinos, F., Gutiérrez-Martínez, O., Scott, W., McCracken, L. M., & We are grateful to the CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health Luciano, J. V. (2018). Current status of acceptance and commitment therapy for (CIBERESP CB22/02/00052; ISCIII), CIBER of Obesity and Nutrition chronic pain: A narrative review. Journal of Pain Research, 11, 2145. Feliu-Soler, A., Pérez-Aranda, A., Luciano, J. V., Demarzo, M., Mariño, M., Soler, J., Van Pathophysiology (CIBEROBN; CB06/03/0052), and CIBER of Mental Gordon, W., García-Campayo, J., & Montero-Marín, J. (2021). Psychometric Health (CIBERSAM; CB/07/09/0010) for their support. The funding properties of the 15-item five facet mindfulness questionnaire in a large sample of bodies did not play any role in the analysis and interpretation of data, in Spanish pilgrims. Mindfulness, 12(4), 852–862. García-Campayo, J., Zamorano, E., Ruiz, M. A., Pérez-Páramo, M., López-Gómez, V., & the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to submit the paper for Rejas, J. (2012). The assessment of generalized anxiety disorder: Psychometric publication. Additionally, we wish to thank the Research Network on validation of the Spanish version of the self-administered GAD-2 scale in daily Chronicity, Primary Care, and Health Promotion (RICAPPS, RD21/ medical practice. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 10(1), 1–10. 0016/0005) that is part of the Results-Oriented Cooperative Research Garcia-Garzon, E., Abad, F. J., & Garrido, L. E. (2021). On omega hierarchical estimation: A comparison of exploratory Bi-factor analysis algorithms. Multivariate Behavioral Networks in Health (RICORS). Research, 56(1), 101–119. Gloster, A. T., Block, V. J., Klotsche, J., Villanueva, J., Rinner, M. T., Benoy, C., Appendix A. Supplementary data Walter, M., Karekla, M., & Bader, K. (2021). Psy-flex: A contextually sensitive measure of psychological flexibility. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 22, 13–23. Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. Graham, C. D., Gouick, J., Ferreira, N., & Gillanders, D. (2016). The influence of org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2023.05.001. psychological flexibility on life satisfaction and mood in muscle disorders. Rehabilitation Psychology, 61(2), 210–217. Grégoire, S., Gagnon, J., Lachance, L., Shankland, R., Dionne, F., Kotsou, I., Monestès, J., References Rolffs, J. L., & Rogge, R. D. (2020). Validation of the English and French versions of the multidimensional psychological flexibility inventory short form (MPFI-24). A-Tjak, J. G., Davis, M. L., Morina, N., Powers, M. B., Smits, J. A., & Emmelkamp, P. M. Journal of contextual behavioral science, 18, 99–110. (2015). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of acceptance and commitment therapy for Gu, J., Strauss, C., Crane, C., Barnhofer, T., Karl, A., Cavanagh, K., & Kuyken, W. (2016). clinically relevant mental and physical health problems. Psychotherapy and Examining the factor structure of the 39-item and 15-item versions of the Five Facet Psychosomatics, 84(1), 30–36. Mindfulness Questionnaire before and after mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for Åkerblom, S., Cervin, M., Perrin, S., Rivano-Fischer, M., Gerdle, B., & McCracken, L. M. people with recurrent depression. Psychological Assessment, 28, 791–802. (2021). A network analysis of clinical variables in chronic pain: A study from the Hall, J., Basarin, V. J., Lockstone-Binney, L., Yusuf, A., Winter, C., & Valos, M. (2018). Swedish quality registry for pain rehabilitation (SQRP). Pain Medicine, 22(7), Spiritual values and motives of secular pilgrims. International Journal of Consumer 1591–1602. Studies, 42(6), 715–723. Amaro, S., Antunes, A., & Henriques, C. (2018). A closer look at Santiago de Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for Compostela’s pilgrims through the lens of motivations. Tourism Management, 64, estimating reliability. But….Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. 271–280. Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and Baer, R. (2019). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report. Current Opinion in Psychology, commitment therapy: Model, processes, and outcomes. Behaviour Research and 28, 42–48. Therapy, 44(1), 1–25. Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self- Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy: An report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), experiential approach to behavior change. New York: Guilford Press. 27–45. Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., & Wilson, K. G. (2012). Acceptance & Commitment Therapy: The Bai, Z., Luo, S., Zhang, L., Wu, S., & Chi, I. (2020). Acceptance and commitment therapy process and practice of mindful change (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press. (ACT) to reduce depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K., Wilson, K. G., Bissett, R. T., Pistorello, J., Toarmino, D., Affective Disorders, 260, 728–737. Polusny, M. A., Dykstra, T. A., Batten, S. V., Bergan, J., Stewart, S. H., Barrett, K., O’Connor, M., & McHugh, L. (2019). A systematic review of values-based Zvolensky, M. J., Eifert, G. H., Bond, F. W., Forsyth, J. P., Karekla, M., & psychometric tools within acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Psychological McCurry, S. M. (2004). Measuring experiential avoidance: A preliminary test of a Record, 69(4), 457–485. working model. Psychological Record, 54(4), 553–578. Bluett, E. J., Homan, K. J., Morrison, K. L., Levin, M. E., & Twohig, M. P. (2014). Herrero, J. (2010). Confirmatory factor analysis in the study of the structure and stability Acceptance and commitment therapy for anxiety and OCD spectrum disorders: An of assessment instruments: An example with the self-Esteem questionnaire (CA-14). empirical review. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 28(6), 612–624. Psychosocial Intervention, 19(3), 289–300. Bond, F. W., Hayes, S. C., Baer, R. A., Carpenter, K. M., Guenole, N., Orcutt, H. K., Howell, A. J., & Demuynck, K. M. (2021). Psychological flexibility and psychological Waltz, T., & Zettle, R. D. (2011). Preliminary psychometric properties of the inflexibility are independently associated with both hedonic and eudaimonic well- acceptance and action questionnaire–II: A revised measure of psychological being. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 20, 163–171. inflexibility and experiential avoidance. Behavior Therapy, 42(4), 676–688. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure Brumec, S., Lavrič, M., & Naterer, A. (2022). Exceptional human experiences among analysis: Conventional criteria vs. new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, pilgrims on the Camino de Santiago: A typology of experiences and transformative 1–55. aftereffects. In Psychology of religion and spirituality. Advance online publication. Kashdan, T. B., Disabato, D. J., Goodman, F. R., Doorley, J. D., & McKnight, P. E. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000456. Understanding psychological flexibility: A multimethod exploration of pursuing Cano-Vindel, A., Muñoz-Navarro, R., Medrano, L. A., Ruiz-Rodríguez, P., González- valued goals despite the presence of distress. Psychological Assessment, 32(9), 829. Blanch, C., Gómez-Castillo, M. D., Capafons, A., Chacón, F., Santolaya, F., & PsicAP Khoury, B., Knäuper, B., Schlosser, M., Carrière, K., & Chiesa, A. (2017). Effectiveness of Research Group.. (2018). A computerized version of the Patient Health traditional meditation retreats: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Questionnaire-4 as an ultra-brief screening tool to detect emotional disorders in Psychosomatic Research, 92, 16–25. primary care. Journal of Affective Disorders, 234, 247–255. Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. W. (2003). The Patient health questionnaire- Carvalho, S. A., Palmeira, L., Pinto-Gouveia, J., Gillanders, D., & Castilho, P. (2018). The 2: Validity of a two-item depression screener. Medical Care, 41, 1284–1292. utility of the Valuing Questionnaire in chronic pain. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B. W., Monahan, P. O., & Löwe, B. (2007). Anxiety Science, 9, 21–29. disorders in primary care: Prevalence, impairment, comorbidity, and detection. Cheer, J. M., Belhassen, Y., & Kujawa, J. (2017). The search for spirituality in tourism: Annals of Internal Medicine, 146, 317–325. Toward a conceptual framework for spiritual tourism. Tourism Management Landi, G., Pakenham, K. I., Giovannetti, A. M., Presti, G., Boccolini, G., Cola, A., Perspectives, 24, 252–256. Grandi, S., & Tossani, E. (2021). Italian validation of the Italian multidimensional Chen, J., & Chen, Z. (2008). Extended Bayesian information criteria for model selection psychological flexibility inventory (MPFI). Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, with large model spaces. Biometrika, 95(3), 759–771. 21, 57–65. 276 J. Navarrete et al. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 28 (2023) 266–277 Lecuona, O., García-Rubio, C., de Rivas, S., Moreno-Jiménez, J. E., Meda-Lara, R. M., & evidence. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 12(3), Rodríguez-Carvajal, R. (2021). A network analysis of the five facets mindfulness 333–358. questionnaire (FFMQ). Mindfulness, 12, 2281–2294. Ruiz, F. J., Suárez-Falcón, J. C., Segura-Vargas, M. A., & Gil-Luciano, B. (2022). Levin, M. E., MacLane, C., Daflos, S., Seeley, J. R., Hayes, S. C., Biglan, A., & Pistorello, J. Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Valuing Questionnaire in (2014). Examining psychological inflexibility as a transdiagnostic process across Colombian clinical and nonclinical samples. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 78(2), psychological disorders. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3(3), 155–163. 233–248. Lin, Y. Y., Rogge, R. D., & Swanson, D. P. (2020). Cross-cultural flexibility: Validation of Sandín, B., Chorot, P., Lostao, L., Joiner, T. E., Santed, M. A., & Valiente, R. M. (1999). the traditional Mandarin, simplified Mandarin, and Japanese translations of the Escalas PANAS de afecto positivo y negativo: Validación factorial y convergencia multidimensional psychological flexibility inventory. Journal of Contextual transcultural. Psicothema, 11(1), 37–51. Behavioral Science, 15, 73–84. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of Liutikas, D. (2017). The manifestation of values and identity in travelling: The social structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit engagement of pilgrimage. Tourism Management Perspectives, 24, 217–224. measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8, 23–74. Lucarini, A., Fuochi, G., & Voci, A. (2022). A deep dive into compassion: Italian Schmank, C. J., Goring, S. A., Kovacs, K., & Conway, A. R. (2019). Psychometric network validation, network analysis, and correlates of recent compassion scales. In European analysis of the Hungarian WAIS. Journal of Intelligence, 7(3), 21. journal of psychological assessment. Advance online publication. Schnell, T., & Pali, S. (2013). Pilgrimage today: The meaning-making potential of ritual. Lucas, J. J., & Moore, K. A. (2020). Psychological flexibility: Positive implications for Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 16, 887–902. mental health and life satisfaction. Health Promotion International, 35(2), 312–320. Seidler, D., Stone, B., Clark, B. E., Koran, J., & Drake, C. E. (2020). Evaluating the factor Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary structure of the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory: An reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137–155. independent replication and extension. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 17, Mau, M., Aaby, A., Klausen, S. H., & Roessler, K. K. (2021). Are long-distance walks 23–31. therapeutic? A systematic scoping review of the conceptualization of long-distance Smout, M., Davies, M., Burns, N., & Christie, A. (2014). Development of the valuing walking and its relation to mental health. International Journal of Environmental questionnaire (VQ). Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3(3), 164–172. Research and Public Health, 18(15), 7741. Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of Mau, M., Klausen, S. H., & Roessler, K. K. (2023). Becoming a person: How long-distance instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user- walking can lead to personal growth–A cultural and health-related approach. New friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(2), 268–274. Ideas in Psychology, 68, Article 100975. Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. (2007). Using multivariate statistics, 5 pp. McCracken, L. M., Chilcot, J., & Norton, S. (2015). Further development in the 481–498). Boston, MA: Pearson. assessment of psychological flexibility: A shortened committed action questionnaire Thompson, E. R. (2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short- (CAQ-8). European Journal of Pain, 19(5), 677–685. form of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-Cultural McNally, R. J. (2016). Can network analysis transform psychopathology? Behaviour Psychology, 38(2), 227–242. Research and Therapy, 86, 95–104. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 58, 267–288. Methods, 23(3), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144 Tonarelli, S. B., Pasillas, R., Alvarado, L., Dwivedi, A., & Cancellare, A. (2016). Morinis, A. (1992). Introduction: The territory of the anthropology of pilgrimage. In Acceptance and commitment therapy compared to treatment as usual in psychosis: A A. Morinis (Ed.), Sacred journeys: The anthropology of pilgrimage (pp. 1–28). systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Psychiatry, 19(3), 2–5. Greenwood. Trindade, I. A., Ferreira, C., Pinto-Gouveia, J., & Nooren, L. (2016). Clarity of personal Öst, L. G. (2014). The efficacy of acceptance and commitment therapy: An updated values and committed action: Development of a shorter engaged living scale. Journal systematic review and meta-analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 61, 105–121. of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 38(2), 258–265. Pilgrim’s Office. (n.d.). http://oficinadelperegrino.com/en/. Trompetter, H. R., Ten Klooster, P. M., Schreurs, K. M., Fledderus, M., Westerhof, G. J., & Pilgrim’s Office. (2021). Informe estadístico: Año 2021 [Statistical Report: 2021]. Bohlmeijer, E. T. (2013). Measuring values and committed action with the engaged https://catedral.df-server.info/est/peregrinaciones2021.pdf. living scale (ELS): Psychometric evaluation in a nonclinical sample and a chronic Powers, M. B., Vörding, M. B. Z. V. S., & Emmelkamp, P. M. (2009). Acceptance and pain sample. Psychological Assessment, 25(4), 1235. commitment therapy: A meta-analytic review. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 78 Vallejo, M. A., Vallejo-Slocker, L., Fernández-Abascal, E. G., & Mañanes, G. (2018). (2), 73–80. Determining factors for stress perception assessed with the Perceived Stress Scale Rickardsson, J., Zetterqvist, V., Kemani, M. K., Holmström, L., Andersson, E., & (PSS-4) in Spanish and other European samples. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 37. Wicksell, R. K. (2019). Assessing values–Psychometric properties of the Swedish Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement version of the Valuing Questionnaire in adults with chronic pain. Journal of invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for Contextual Behavioral Science, 14, 40–49. organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4–70. Robinaugh, D. J., Millner, A. J., & McNally, R. J. (2016). Identifying highly influential Vazquez, C., Duque, A., & Hervas, G. (2013). Satisfaction with life scale in a nodes in the complicated grief network. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(6), 747. representative sample of Spanish adults: Validation and normative data. Spanish Rolffs, J. L., Rogge, R. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2018). Disentangling components of flexibility Journal of Psychology, 16, 1–15. via the hexaflex model: Development and validation of the multidimensional Wilson, K. G., Sandoz, E. K., Kitchens, J., & Roberts, M. (2010). The Valued Living psychological flexibility inventory (MPFI). Assessment, 25(4), 458–482. Questionnaire: Defining and measuring valued action within a behavioral Romano, D., Maravita, A., & Perugini, M. (2021). Psychometric properties of the framework. Psychological Record, 60(2), 249–272. embodiment scale for the rubber hand illusion and its relation with individual Wright, K. B. (2005). Researching Internet-based populations: Advantages and differences. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 5029. disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software Ruiz, F. J. (2012). Acceptance and commitment therapy versus traditional cognitive packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10 behavioral therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of current empirical (3), JCMC1034. XXXX, D. (2014, XXXX). (XXX [Symposium]. XXX, Spain). 277