In plain language
Researchers have argued for years about how to measure self-compassion. The most popular tool, Neff’s Self-Compassion Scale, mixes positive items (being kind to yourself) and negative items (judging yourself harshly). One camp says these form a single dimension — more kindness means less criticism — while another camp says they are two semi-independent tendencies and that self-criticism is not part of “true” self-compassion. This commentary reviews the evidence for both positions and concludes the data cannot yet settle the debate, partly because radically different statistical models can fit the same data equally well.
The authors propose a middle path: stop treating self-compassion as a fixed latent structure and instead view self-kindness and self-judgment as a dynamic network of interacting processes whose relationship depends on context. They offer three testable hypotheses: the link between kindness and criticism should strengthen when measured over shorter time frames, should shift with current circumstances (for example after a failure or during evaluation), and should differ from person to person.
Using data from 1,939 Australian adolescents, they show why the person-to-person hypothesis matters: while self-kindness and self-judgment were negatively related on average, about a quarter of youth were high in both or low in both, and longitudinal analyses confirmed the kindness–judgment link varies significantly across individuals. The practical upshot is that clinicians and researchers should look at how these processes work within each person — an idionomic, process-based approach — rather than assuming one scoring method or one model fits everyone.
Key findings
- Neither the single-dimension (bipolar) view nor the two-factor view of the Self-Compassion Scale is proven right or wrong — current data cannot resolve the debate, and statistically equivalent models make fit indices an unreliable arbiter.
- Three testable contextual hypotheses are proposed: the structure of self-compassion depends on the time frame of measurement, on current circumstances, and on individual differences.
- In 1,939 Grade 10 students, correlations between compassionate and uncompassionate subscales ranged from only −0.06 to −0.30, and about one quarter of youth were high in both self-kindness and self-judgment or low in both.
- Longitudinal multilevel analyses (952 youth followed from Grades 9 to 12) showed the within-person link between self-kindness and self-judgment differed significantly across people; for some youth, increases in self-kindness were even accompanied by increases in self-judgment.
- The authors recommend reporting the 2-factor or 6-factor scoring of the Self-Compassion Scale, with subscale analyses included whenever a total score is used.
- Process-based, idionomic case conceptualization is proposed as a way to tailor self-compassion interventions to how each individual client’s inner processes actually interact.
How to cite
APA
Ferrari, M., Ciarrochi, J., Yap, K., Sahdra, B., & Hayes, S. C. (2022). Embracing the complexity of our inner worlds: Understanding the dynamics of self-compassion and self-criticism. Mindfulness, 13, 1652–1661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-022-01897-5
BibTeX
@article{ferrari2022embracing,
author = {Ferrari, Madeleine and Ciarrochi, Joseph and Yap, Keong and Sahdra, Baljinder and Hayes, Steven C.},
title = {Embracing the Complexity of our Inner Worlds: Understanding the Dynamics of Self-Compassion and Self-Criticism},
journal = {Mindfulness},
year = {2022},
volume = {13},
pages = {1652--1661},
doi = {10.1007/s12671-022-01897-5}
}
Related work
- All publications by Joseph Ciarrochi (searchable, with free PDFs)
- Process-Based Therapy & Idionomic Analysis
Author: Joseph Ciarrochi (ORCID 0000-0003-0471-8100). Free copy hosted with permission for scholarly use. Please cite the published version via the DOI above.