Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS)
Also known as: PHLMS, PHLMS-20
The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS) is a 20-item self-report instrument measuring trait mindfulness across two core dimensions: Present-Moment Awareness and Acceptance. Developed by Cardaciotto, Herbert, and colleagues at Drexel University and published in Assessment in 2008, the PHLMS emphasizes the integration of attentional and acceptance-based processes central to contemporary mindfulness theory and practice. The two-factor structure reflects the distinction between the ability to focus attention on present experience and the capacity to receive that experience without judgment or resistance—processes that jointly characterize psychological flexibility and adaptive mindfulness.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
The PHLMS is particularly useful for: (1) acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) trials evaluating both awareness and acceptance as process variables; (2) research examining the separate and joint contributions of awareness and acceptance to mental health outcomes; (3) clinical assessment in anxiety, pain, and trauma populations where both awareness deficits (avoidance) and acceptance deficits (resistance) are common; (4) studies investigating the mechanisms through which mindfulness-based interventions produce benefit. The PHLMS is less suitable for populations requiring more granular multidimensional assessment (FFMQ offers five factors) or for state-level measurement.
Strengths & limitations
- Theoretically elegant two-factor model: Present-Moment Awareness and Acceptance represent complementary processes that jointly constitute psychological flexibility, providing clear clinical and theoretical scaffolding.
- Practical length: 20 items offer a middle ground—more detailed than brief measures (MAAS, CAMS-R) but shorter than comprehensive multidimensional instruments (FFMQ with 39 items).
- Separate subscale utility: the two subscales can be interpreted independently, permitting identification of specific deficits (awareness vs. acceptance) and targeted intervention planning.
- Strong psychometric properties: the PHLMS demonstrates good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and discriminant validity from related constructs (experiential avoidance, rumination).
- Limited normative data: compared to FFMQ and MAAS, the PHLMS has fewer published normative samples and clinical cutoffs, requiring researchers to develop local standards.
- Factor structure variability: some studies report alternative factor models or cross-loading items, suggesting the two-factor structure, while conceptually sound, is not universally replicated.
- Subscale specificity: the Present-Moment Awareness subscale overlaps conceptually with the MAAS; the Acceptance subscale shares content with other acceptance measures, raising questions about discriminant validity.
- Research base: the PHLMS is newer and less frequently cited than FFMQ or MAAS, limiting available comparative data and replication of findings.
Frequently asked
How does PHLMS differ from FFMQ or MAAS?
MAAS is unidimensional (Attention); CAMS-R is four-factor (Attention, Awareness, Present-Moment, Non-Judgment); FFMQ is five-factor (Observing, Describing, Acting with Awareness, Non-Judging, Non-Reactivity); PHLMS is two-factor (Present-Moment Awareness, Acceptance). Choose PHLMS if you want to distinguish awareness from acceptance specifically. Choose FFMQ if you need detailed multidimensional facets. Choose MAAS if you want simplicity and strong well-being correlations.
My client scored 45 on PHLMS (moderate total) but 38 Awareness / 7 Acceptance. What does this profile indicate?
This is a classic anxiety/rumination profile: high awareness with low acceptance means the client notices and attends to anxious thoughts and sensations acutely (perhaps excessively—hypervigilance) but resists and fights them, amplifying discomfort. Treatment should target acceptance-based approaches: mindful exposure, defusion from anxious thoughts, and willingness to experience anxiety. Practicing 'allowing' and 'letting go' rather than more attention or analysis would be helpful.
Can PHLMS distinguish between rumination and adaptive present-moment awareness?
The PHLMS can help: high Present-Moment Awareness combined with low Acceptance may suggest rumination (attention to thoughts without letting them go). Alone, PHLMS cannot definitively diagnose rumination; combine it with specific rumination measures (Ruminative Response Scale) and clinical observation for clarity.
Is PHLMS sensitive to change from mindfulness-based interventions?
Yes. Both subscales show increases following MBSR and MBCT, though Acceptance typically shows larger effect sizes than Present-Moment Awareness. This pattern makes sense: meditation practice develops both skills, but acceptance (willingness to experience discomfort) may be the 'active ingredient' producing symptom change, while awareness may plateau or show less dramatic change.
Sources
- Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008). The assessment of present-moment awareness and acceptance: The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale. Assessment, 15(2), 204-223. DOI: 10.1177/1073191107311467 ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (PHLMS). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/mindfulness-psychology/philadelphia-mindfulness-scale
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness ScaleMindfulness Psychology↔ compare
- Five Facet Mindfulness QuestionnaireMindfulness Psychology↔ compare
- Freiburg Mindfulness InventoryMindfulness Psychology↔ compare
- Toronto Mindfulness ScaleMindfulness Psychology↔ compare