Does Self-Compassion Entail Reduced Self-Judgment, Isolation, and Over-Identification? A Response to Muris, Otgaar, and Petrocchi (2016)

I read with interest the critique of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) published in Mindfulness titled BProtection as the Mirror Image of Psychopathology: Further Critical Notes on the Self-Compassion Scale^ (Muris et al. 2016). The critique is based in large part on a recent article I published in Mindfulness (Neff 2016) titled BThe Self-Compassion Scale is a Valid and Theoretically Coherent Measure of SelfCompassion^ and readers interested in the topic should probably read this article in addition to the critique to make sense of the issues involved. Although I do not agree with most of the authors’ criticisms, it is my hope that an objective discussion can be had of the merits and drawbacks of using the SCS as it is currently designed. I will therefore consider each substantive issue in turn, briefly outlining the issues and providing my response, so that readers can decide for themselves. In my article, I responded to an earlier critique by Muris (2015) which had argued that inclusion of subscales measuring self-judgment, isolation, and over-identification in the SCS was a Bmismeasure^ of self-compassion, by pointing out that the SCS measures self-compassion exactly as I define it. In their new critique the authors write Bthis is just totally incorrect. In fact, even in her more recent papers, she still advocates that the construct basically contains three positive components that are dimensional in nature. The negative components in the SCS are merely described as the opposites of the three positive components.^ The issue appears to be whether describing the negative components as opposite to the positive components means they are not part of the definition of self-compassion, and more importantly, whether the negative components should be included in the definition of self-compassion in the first place. In the introduction to the SCS scale development paper, I wrote BSelf-compassion...entails three basic components: 1) extending kindness and understanding to oneself rather than harsh self-criticism and judgment; 2) seeing one’s experiences as part of the larger human experience rather than as separating and isolating; and 3) holding one’s painful thoughts and feelings in balanced awareness rather than over-identifying with them. These aspects of self-compassion are experienced differently and are conceptually distinct, but they also tend to engender one another. For instance, the accepting, detached stance of mindfulness lessens self-judgment. Conversely, if one stops judging and berating oneself long enough to experience a degree of self-kindness, the impact of negative emotional experiences will be lessened, making it easier to maintain balanced awareness of one’s thoughts and emotions. Similarly, realizing that suffering and personal failures are shared with others lessens the degree of blame and harsh judgment placed on oneself, just as a lessening of selfjudgment can soften feelings of uniqueness and isolation^ (Neff 2003a, p. 224–225). In other words, I defined selfcompassion as a state of mind involving increased selfkindness and reduced self-judgment, increased common humanity and reduced isolation, increased mindfulness and reduced over-identification, and proposed that these elements mutually influence each other. It should be noted that each pair of opposing components focus on a different dimension of self-to-self relating—how individuals emotionally respond, cognitively understand, or pay attention to their suffering. In every moment of failure or distress, individuals have a choice to be caring and understanding toward themselves (self-kindness) or cold and critical * Kristin D. Neff kristin.neff@mail.utexas.edu