Published

2022-01-01

Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad

Internal structure of the Mindfulness and Equanimity Peruvian Inventory

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718

Keywords:

análisis factorial, ecuanimidad, mindfulness, teoría de respuesta al ítem (es)
equanimity, factor analysis, item response theory, mindfulness (en)

Downloads

Authors

El propósito del presente estudio es examinar la validez de constructo y consistencia interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad. Basado en el análisis factorial y la Teoría de Respuesta al Item (Modelo de Crédito Parcial y el Método de Escalabilidad de Mokken), se examinó la magnitud de los parámetros y se estimó la varianza de cada uno de los ítems para contribuir en el constructo general de mindfulness. La muestra del estudio está compuesta por 602 adultos, estudiantes de tres instituciones académicas de educación superior de Lima, Chiclayo y Chimbote en el Perú. Los resultados de estos análisis indican una estructura unidimensional del instrumento, en función a ocho ítems representados por los atributos de atención, consciencia, aceptación, juicio de valor, y ecuanimidad. Los indicadores de ajuste del modelo de factores oblicuos para los ítems seleccionados fueron satisfactorios: CFI = .982, RMSEA = .043 (IC90% = .029, .056), SRMR = .048, SB-c2 (gl: 35) = 73.415 (p > 0.05). 

 

Cómo citar este artículo: Moscoso, M. S., & Merino-Soto, C. M. (2020). Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 31(1), 49-64. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718

The main purpose of this study is to report the construct validity and internal consistency of the Peruvian Inventory of Mindfulness and Equanimity. Based on the factor analysis and the Item response Theory (the Partial Credit Model and the Mokken Scale Analysis), the parameters magnitude was examined, and the variance of each item of the instrument that contribute to the general construct of mindfulness, was estimated. The analyses were carried out on a sample of 602 adults, students from three educational institutions at the university level in the cities of Lima, Chiclayo and Chimbote in Peru. The results of all the analyses performed on this peruvian sample suggest a unidimensional structure of this inventory, based on the eight items selected that include the abilities of attention, consciousness, acceptance, judgment and equanimity. the goodness of fit index and adjusted goodness of fit index for the oblique factors were satisfactory: CFI = .982, RMSEA = .043 (IC90% = .029, .056), SRMR = .048, SB-2 (gl: 35) = 73.415 (p > 0.05). 

 

How to cite this article: Moscoso, M. S., & Merino-Soto, C. M. (2020). Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 31(1), 49-64. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718

References

Baer, R., Smith, G., & 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 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191104268029

Baer, R., Smith, G., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27-45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191105283504 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191105283504

Baer, R. A., Smith, G., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., ... & Williams, J. M. G. (2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment, 15(3), 329-342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191107313003

Beauducel, A., & Herzberg, P. Y. (2006) On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in cfa. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13:2, 186-203. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1302_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1302_2

Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., ... & Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230-241. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bph077 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bph077

Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., MelgarQuiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in public health, 6, 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149

Bowen, N. K., & Masa, R. D. (2015). Conducting measurement invariance tests with ordinal data: A guide for social work researchers. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 6(2), 229-249. https://doi.org/10.1086/681607 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/681607

Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822-848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 DOI: 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, 211-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400701598298 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400701598298

Browne, M. W. (1972). Oblique rotation to a partially specified target. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 25, 207-212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.20448317.1972.tb00492.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1972.tb00492.x

Buchheld, N., Grossman, P., & Walach, H. (2001). Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (vipassana) and meditation-based psychotherapy: The development of the Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (fmi). Journal for Meditation and Meditation Research, 1, 11-34.

Buela-Casal, G., Sierra, J. C., Carretero-Dios, H., & De los Santos-Roig, M. (2002). Situación actual de la evaluación psicológica en lengua castellana. Papeles del Psicólogo, 83, 27-33.

Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008). The assessment of present-moment awareness and acceptance. Assessment, 15(2), 204-223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191107311467 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191107311467

Carretero-Dios, H., & Perez, C. (2005). Normas para el desarrollo y revisión de estudios instrumentales. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 5(3), 521-551.

Chau, C., & Saravia, J. C. (2014). Adaptación universitaria y su relación con la salud percibida en una muestra de jóvenes de Perú. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 23(2), 269-284. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v23n2.41106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v23n2.41106

DeCarlo, L. T. (1997). On the meaning and use of kurtosis. Psychological Methods, 2(3), 292-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.2.3.292 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.2.3.292

DeSalvo, K. B., Bloser, N., Reynolds, K., He, J., & Muntner, P. (2006). Mortality prediction with a single general self-rated health question. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(3), 267-275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15251497.2005.00291.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00291.x

DeSalvo, K. B., Fan, V. S., McDonell, M. B., & Fihn, S. D. (2005). Predicting mortality and healthcare utilization with a single question. Health Services Research, 40(4), 1234-1246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14756773.2005.00404.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00404.x

DeSalvo, K. B., Jones, T. M., Peabody, J., McDonald, J., Fihn, S., Fan, V., ... & Muntner, P. (2009). Health care expenditure prediction with a single item, self-rated health measure. Medical care, 47(4), 440-447. https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0b013e318190b716 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318190b716

Desbordes, G., Gard, T., Hoge, E. A., Hölzel, B. K., Kerr, C., Lazar, S. W., ... & Vago, D. R. (2015). Moving beyond mindfulness: defining equanimity as an outcome measure in meditation and contemplative research. Mindfulness, 6(2), 356-372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-013-0269-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-013-0269-8

DiStefano, C., & Morgan, G. B. (2014) A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 425-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915373

Elo, A.L., Leppänen, A., & Jahkola, A. (2003). Validity of a single-item measure of stress symptoms. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environmental Health, 29, 444-451. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.752 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.752

Feldman, G., Hayes, A., Kumar, S., Greeson, J., & Laurenceau, J. (2007). Mindfulness and emotion regulation: The development and initial validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness ScaleRevised (cams-R). Journal of Psychopathology & Behavioral Assessment, 29(3), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-006-9035-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-006-9035-8

Ferrando, P., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: Algunas consideraciones adicionales. Anales de Psicología, 30 (3), 1170-1175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199991

Graham, J. M. (2006). Congeneric and (essentially) tau-equivalent estimates of score reliability: What they are and how to use them. Educacional and Psychological Measurement, 66(6), 930 – 944. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316440628816 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406288165

Hambleton, R. K. (2000). Issues, Designs, and Technical Guidelines for Adapting Tests in Multiple Languages and Cultures. In R.K. Hambleton, P.F. Merenda, & C.D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting Educational and Psychological Tests for Cross-Cultural Assessment. Hillsdale, nj: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

Hambleton, R. K., & Patsula, L. (1999). Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptations practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 1(1), 1-30.

Kang, T., & Chen, T. T. (2008). Performance of the generalized S‐c2 item fit index for polytomous irt models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45(4), 391 – 406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2008.00071.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2008.00071.x

Leis, M., Schmidt, K. M., & Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2015). Using the partial credit model to evaluate the student engagement in mathematics scale. Journal of Applied Measurement, 16(3), 251-267.

Li, C. H. (2016a). The performance of ml, dwls, and uls estimation with robust corrections in structural equation models with ordinal variables. Psychological Methods, 21(3), 369-87. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000093

Li, C. H. (2016b). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 936-49. https://doi.org/10.3758/s134280150619-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7

Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2013). factor 9.2 A comprehensive program for fitting exploratory and semiconfirmatory factor analysis and irt models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(6), 497-498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621613487794 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621613487794

Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ten Berge, J. M. (2006). Tucker’s Congruence Coefficient as a meaningful index of factor similarity. Methodology, 2, 57–64. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.2.2.57 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.2.2.57

Luo, G. (2005). The relationship between the Rating Scale and Partial Credit Models and the implication of disordered thresholds of the Rasch models for polytomous responses. Journal of Applied Measurement, 6(4), 443-55.

Mair, P., & Hatzinger, R. (2007). Extended Rasch modeling: The erm package for the application of irt models in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 20(9), 1-20. Available in: http://www.jstatsoft.org/v20/i09 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v020.i09

Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47,149–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02296272 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296272

Masters, G. N. (1988) The analysis of partial credit scoring. Applied Measurement in Education, 1(4), 279-297. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0104_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0104_2

Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2005). Limited and full information estimation and goodness-of-fit testing in 2n tables: A unified approach. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 1009-1020. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000002069 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000002069

Millsap, R. E., & Tein, J.-Y. (2004). Assessing factorial invariance in ordered-categorical measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 479-515. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr3903_4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3903_4

Mokken, R. J. (1971). A theory and procedure of scale analysis. The Hague: Mouton. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110813203

Moscoso, M. S., Burga, A. Oblitas, L., Bayona, S., & Arana, A. (2020). Validez de constructo y confiabilidad del Inventario de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad. Revista de Psicología, pucp, 38(2), 553-575. https://doi.org/10.18800/psico.202002.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18800/psico.202002.008

Moscoso, M. S., & Lengacher, C. A. (2015). Mecanismos neurocognitivos de la terapia basada en mindfulness. Liberabit, Revista de Psicología. 21, 221-233.

Moscoso, M. S., & Merino-Soto, C. M. (2017). Construcción y validez de contenido del Inventario de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad: una perspectiva iberoamericana.

Mindfulness & Compassion, 2, 9-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mincom.2017.01.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mincom.2017.01.001

Moscoso, M. S., & Spielberger, C. D. (2011). Cross-cultural assessment of emotions: The expression of anger. Revista de Psicología, pucp, 29(2), 343-360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18800/psico.201102.007

Muthén, B. (1978). Contributions to factor analysis of dichotomous variables. Psychometrika, 43(4), 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293813

Nilsson, H., & Kazemi, A. (2016). Mindfulness therapies and assessment scales: A brief review. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 8(1), 11-19. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijps.v8n1p11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijps.v8n1p11

Oliveri, M. E., Ercikan, K., & Simon, M. (2015). A framework for developing comparable multilingual assessments for minority populations: Why context matters. International Journal of Testing, 00, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2014.986271 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2014.986271

Park, T., Reilly-Spong, M., & Gross, C. R. (2013). Mindfulness: A systematic review of instruments to measure an emergent patient-reported outcome (pro). Quality of life research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 22(10), 2639–2659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0395-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0395-8

Petrocelli, J. (2003). Factor validation of the consideration of future consequences scale: Evidence for a short version. The Journal of Social Psychology, 143(4), 405-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540309598453 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540309598453

Rodríguez, T. C., Cadena, C. H. G., Bossio, M. R., Orosco, I. C., Guadalupe, L. A. O., & Gallegos, W. L. A. (2019). Evidencias psicométricas de una versión breve de la mindful awareness attention scale en estudiantes universitarios. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento (racc), 11(3), 19-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v11.n3.24870

Roelen, C. A., Heymans, M. W., Twisk, J. W., Laaksonen, M., Pallesen, S., Magerøy, N., ... & Bjorvatn, B. (2015). Health measures in prediction models for high sickness absence: Single-item self-rated health versus multi-item sf-12. The European Journal of Public Health, 25(4), 668-672. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cku192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cku192

Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. url: http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

Salminen, S., Kouvonen, A., Koskinen, A., Joensuu, M., & Väänänen, A. (2014). Is a single item stress measure independently associated with subsequent severe injury: A prospective cohort study of 16,385 forest industry employees? bmc Public Health, 14, 543. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-543. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-543

Saltelli A. (2002). Sensitivity analysis for importance assessment. Risk Analysis, 22(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/02724332.00040 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00040

Smith, A. B., Rush, R., Fallowfield, L. J., Velikova, G., & Sharpe, M. (2008). Rasch fit statistics and sample size considerations for polytomous data. bmc Medical Research Methodology, 8, 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-33 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-33

Soler Ribaudi, J., Tejedor, R., Feliu-Soler, A., Pascual Segovia, J. C., Cebolla i Martí, A. J., Soriano, J., ... & Pérez, V. (2012). Propiedades psicométricas de la versión española de la escala Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (maas). Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría, 40(1), 19-26.

Spielberger, C. D., Moscoso, M. S., & Brunner, T. M. (2005). Cross-cultural assessment of emotional states and personality traits. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 343-367). Hillsdale, nj: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., & Edelen, M. O. (2013). Using logistic approximations of marginal trace lines to develop short assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37, 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146621612462759 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621612462759

Suárez-Alvarez, J., Pedrosa, I., Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., Cuesta, M., & Muñiz, J. (2018). Using reversed items in Likert scales: A questionable practice. Psicothema, 30(2), 149-158. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.33

Toepoel, V. (2010). Is consideration of future consequences a changeable construct? Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 951-956. https://doi.org//10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.02.029

Van Dam, N. T., Earleywine, M., & Borders, A. (2010). Measuring mindfulness? An item response theory analysis of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 805-810. https://doi.org//10.16/j.paid.2010.07.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.020

Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable meansquare fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 370-371.

Weber, J. (2017). Mindfulness is not enough: Why equanimity holds the key to compassion. Mindfulness & Compassion, 2, 149-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621612462759 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mincom.2017.09.004

Ziegler, M., & Hagemann, D. (2015). Testing the unidimensionality of items: Pitfalls and loopholes. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 231-237. https://doi.org//10.1027/1015-5759/a000309 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000309

How to Cite

APA

Moscoso, M. S. and Merino-Soto, C. (2022). Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad . Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 31(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718

ACM

[1]
Moscoso, M.S. and Merino-Soto, C. 2022. Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad . Revista Colombiana de Psicología. 31, 1 (Jan. 2022), 49–64. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718.

ACS

(1)
Moscoso, M. S.; Merino-Soto, C. Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad . Rev. colomb. psicol. 2022, 31, 49-64.

ABNT

MOSCOSO, M. S.; MERINO-SOTO, C. Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad . Revista Colombiana de Psicología, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 1, p. 49–64, 2022. DOI: 10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718. Disponível em: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/96718. Acesso em: 11 oct. 2024.

Chicago

Moscoso, Manolete S., and Cesar Merino-Soto. 2022. “Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad ”. Revista Colombiana De Psicología 31 (1):49-64. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718.

Harvard

Moscoso, M. S. and Merino-Soto, C. (2022) “Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad ”, Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 31(1), pp. 49–64. doi: 10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718.

IEEE

[1]
M. S. Moscoso and C. Merino-Soto, “Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad ”, Rev. colomb. psicol., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 49–64, Jan. 2022.

MLA

Moscoso, M. S., and C. Merino-Soto. “Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad ”. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, vol. 31, no. 1, Jan. 2022, pp. 49-64, doi:10.15446/rcp.v31n1.96718.

Turabian

Moscoso, Manolete S., and Cesar Merino-Soto. “Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad ”. Revista Colombiana de Psicología 31, no. 1 (January 20, 2022): 49–64. Accessed October 11, 2024. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/96718.

Vancouver

1.
Moscoso MS, Merino-Soto C. Estructura Interna del Inventario Peruano de Mindfulness y Ecuanimidad . Rev. colomb. psicol. [Internet]. 2022 Jan. 20 [cited 2024 Oct. 11];31(1):49-64. Available from: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/96718

Download Citation

CrossRef Cited-by

CrossRef citations0

Dimensions

PlumX

Article abstract page views

604

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The RCP is published under the Creative Commons license and can be copied and reproduced according to the conditions of this license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5). RCP articles are available online at https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/issue/archive. If you would like to subscribe to the RCP as reader, please go to https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/information/readers and follow the instructions mentioned in the webpage. Additionally, a limited number of print journals are available upon request. To request print copies, please email revpsico_fchbog@unal.edu.co.