Corrigendum to “Semantic and sentiment similarities contribute to construct overlaps between mindfulness, Big Five, emotion regulation, and mental health” [Pers. Individ. Differ. 210 (2023) 112241] (Personality and Individual Differences (2023) 210, (S0191886923001642), (10.1016/j.paid.2023.112241))

The authors regret that the denominations of the axes in Figure 2 were switched. Dimension 1 relates to sentiment and Dimension 2 to semantics (see corrected Figure 2). Figure 2 MDS solution[Formula presented] Note. Scales are colored in blue (mindfulness), green (Big Five), red (emotion regulation), and yellow (mental health). The text in Section 3.3 should thus read: “The two MDS dimensions clearly aligned with the results of the sentiment (Dimension 1) and semantic (Dimension 2) analyses. The FFMQ, FFMQ-S, KIMS, NEO-FFI, NEO-PI-R, and ERQ clustered relatively close to one another, whereas the MAAS and BFI were more distant (MAAS on the semantic dimension, BFI on the sentiment dimension). BSI-18 and BSI-53 were most distant to this cluster on the sentiment dimension, with the STAI lying on a midpoint between the respective extremes. The PANAS was most distant to all other scales on the semantic dimension, but closest of all mental health scales to the mindfulness scales on the sentiment dimension. The distances of all scales except MAAS and PANAS on the semantic dimension were <1 (and mostly even <0.5), whereas larger (up to >1.5) on the sentiment dimension.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.