Commentary on Muris and Otgaar (2020): Let the Empirical Evidence Speak on the Self-Compassion Scale

This commentary addresses Muris and Otgaar’s (2020) paper titled “The Process of Science: A Critical Evaluation of More than 15 Years of Research on Self-Compassion with the Self-Compassion Scale.” The Self-Compassion Scale (SCS) is a multidimensional scale measuring self-compassion that includes subscales representing increased compassionate self-responding (CS)—self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness—and reduced uncompassionate self-responding (UCS)—self-judgment, isolation, and overidentification. Muris and Otgaar have proposed that a total SCS score should not be used because CS and UCS are separate and unrelated constructs. I propose that CS and UCS are distinct but related and that a total SCS score can validly be used. More than just asserting their viewpoint, however, Muris and Otgaar (2020) have made ad hominem attacks on any researchers who disagree with them as unscientific, irrational, or unethical. They claimed their position was irrefutable and that continued use of a total SCS score by researchers was evidence of bias. Although they acknowledged the need for empirical data confirming or disconfirming hypotheses generated by the different positions, they offered no confirmable hypotheses of their own and simply assumed the evidence supports their position. I lay out a series of ten hypotheses based on each position to test which is correct. The empirical evidence confirms the position that CS and UCS are related and that a total SCS score can be used, while disconfirming the position that CS and UCS are unrelated and that a total SCS score cannot be used.