Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

In the published article, the author wishes to correct the scoring scale for DPES (rating items on 1 to 5 not the standard 1 to 7 scale). In the Measure section, the below should be updated: The measure of PA was a composite of subscales from the Dispositional Positive Emotions Scale (DPES; Shiota et al., 2006), which ask participants to rate to what extent they agree with a variety of statements on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). We chose to focus on the joy subscale (six items; e.g. “On a typical day, many events make me happy”) and the contentment subscale (five items; e.g. “I am generally a contented person”), as these correspond to high and low arousal PA respectively. The 11 items were added together to form a single DPES PA scale, ranging from 11 to 77. The measure of PA was a composite of subscales from the Dispositional Positive Emotions Scale (DPES; Shiota et al., 2006), which ask participants to rate to what extent they agree with a variety of statements about experience of positive emotions. We chose to focus on the joy subscale (six items; e.g. “On a typical day, many events make me happy”) and the contentment subscale (five items; e.g. “I am generally a contented person”), as these correspond to high and low arousal PA respectively. Each item was rated on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). This a minor modification to the original DPES validation papers (Shiota et al., 2006), where each item was rated on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), meaning the current data cannot be directly benchmarked against existing normative data on the DPES. Thus, this erratum is presented to fix the error. The original article has been corrected.

Original publication

DOI

10.1007/s12671-023-02238-w

Type

Journal article

Journal

Mindfulness

Publication Date

01/01/2023