Search

Objectives: Theoretical work proposed that mindfulness interventions function by enhancing various mindfulness mechanisms, including acceptance, attention monitoring, decentering, self-compassion, and nonreactivity. However, much of what is currently known about the effects of mindfulness interventions on mindfulness mechanisms comes from studies assessing these mechanisms pre- and post-treatment, which provides limited insights into how these mechanisms develop over the course of a mindfulness intervention. The present randomized, waitlist-controlled trial investigated how the proposed mindfulness mechanisms change over the course of an 8-week app-based mindfulness intervention (Headspace). Method: A sample of university employees (n = 132; 76.5% female; age M ± SD = 38.5 ± 11.1; 54.5% White) was randomly assigned to participate in a mindfulness intervention (n = 92) or to a waitlist control group (n = 40). Mindfulness mechanisms were assessed using ecological momentary assessment, with participants providing reports on mindfulness mechanisms five times daily for four days during the baseline (pre-treatment), 2nd, 5th, and 8th weeks, resulting in a total of 6,327 assessments. Results: Changes in the mechanisms of acceptance-attention and nonreactivity were observed from the second week of the intervention onwards, with marginal effects for decentering. These effects showed a steady linear increase in the mindfulness group. Conclusions: Results demonstrate the potential for rapid and sustained improvements in mindfulness mechanisms following an app-based mindfulness intervention. Preregistration: The study was preregistered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03652168. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sleep problems and poorer well-being may be particularly salient for Latino/a college students as they tend to experience sociocultural adjustments during this transitory time. Social connections, a correlate of health, change moment-to-moment for college students and may be experienced differently for people who more strongly endorse horizontal collectivist cultural values. We used ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to examine how in-the-moment social connections influence in-the-moment health, and how horizontal collectivism moderates the moment-to-moment associations. Self-identified Latino/a college students (n = 221) completed a demographic information and cultural values questionnaire and then responded to EMA measures on their social connections, affective and subjective well-being, and sleep for 14 consecutive days. Better in-the-moment social connections associated with better health. Horizontal collectivism moderated some, but not all associations between social connections and health. Social connections are multidimensional and differently predict in-the-moment health among Latino/a college students who more strongly endorse horizontal collectivistic values. We discuss implications for identifying vulnerable well-being moments among this understudied population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research implicates experiences of discrimination in exacerbating cardiometabolic disease (CMD) risk. Belongingness has been suggested as a buffer against the adverse effects of discrimination. However, when discrimination occurs in an environment to which one feels they belong, then the potential benefits of belongingness may dissipate or even exacerbate the effects of discrimination. In the present study, we examined these competing hypotheses on how campus belonging might moderate the relationship between discrimination experienced on campus and CMD risk. College students (n = 160, 60.9% Latino/a/x) reported the frequency of on-campus discrimination and campus belongingness, and then completed items assessing risk for CMD. More frequent discrimination related to higher comparative CMD risk among those who reported high campus belongingness, even after adjusting for relevant covariates. These findings highlight the complicated nature of belongingness in the context of physical health. Future research is needed to better understand the role of environment when considering morbidity among college students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many policy decisions about tobacco control are predicated on rational choice models, which posit (1) that smokers are aware of the risks of cigarettes and (2) that perceived risks have a consistent influence on continued smoking behavior. However, research shows that beliefs about smoking may be vulnerable to changes in internal and external contexts.Using ecological momentary assessment, we tested this by measuring how smokers’ (N = 52) beliefs about smoking varied over time. Four times per day over 1 week, participants responded to measures of smoking intentions, risk perceptions, mood and social outcome expectancies, and internal and external contextual factors.We analyzed this data using multilevel modeling, finding that both smoking intentions, risk perceptions, and expectancies differed between participants as well as between moments.Risk perceptions and mood expectancies were a significant predictor of intentions to smoke in the next 30 min, illustrating the importance of these beliefs in decisional processes. This study was preregistered at the Open Science Foundation: https://osf.io/wmv3s/?view_only=71ad66d3ce3845fcb3bf2b9860d820c9. Our analytic plan was not preregistered.Methods: Many policy decisions about tobacco control are predicated on rational choice models, which posit (1) that smokers are aware of the risks of cigarettes and (2) that perceived risks have a consistent influence on continued smoking behavior. However, research shows that beliefs about smoking may be vulnerable to changes in internal and external contexts.Using ecological momentary assessment, we tested this by measuring how smokers’ (N = 52) beliefs about smoking varied over time. Four times per day over 1 week, participants responded to measures of smoking intentions, risk perceptions, mood and social outcome expectancies, and internal and external contextual factors.We analyzed this data using multilevel modeling, finding that both smoking intentions, risk perceptions, and expectancies differed between participants as well as between moments.Risk perceptions and mood expectancies were a significant predictor of intentions to smoke in the next 30 min, illustrating the importance of these beliefs in decisional processes. This study was preregistered at the Open Science Foundation: https://osf.io/wmv3s/?view_only=71ad66d3ce3845fcb3bf2b9860d820c9. Our analytic plan was not preregistered.Results: Many policy decisions about tobacco control are predicated on rational choice models, which posit (1) that smokers are aware of the risks of cigarettes and (2) that perceived risks have a consistent influence on continued smoking behavior. However, research shows that beliefs about smoking may be vulnerable to changes in internal and external contexts.Using ecological momentary assessment, we tested this by measuring how smokers’ (N = 52) beliefs about smoking varied over time. Four times per day over 1 week, participants responded to measures of smoking intentions, risk perceptions, mood and social outcome expectancies, and internal and external contextual factors.We analyzed this data using multilevel modeling, finding that both smoking intentions, risk perceptions, and expectancies differed between participants as well as between moments.Risk perceptions and mood expectancies were a significant predictor of intentions to smoke in the next 30 min, illustrating the importance of these beliefs in decisional processes. This study was preregistered at the Open Science Foundation: https://osf.io/wmv3s/?view_only=71ad66d3ce3845fcb3bf2b9860d820c9. Our analytic plan was not preregistered.Conclusion: Many policy decisions about tobacco control are predicated on rational choice models, which posit (1) that smokers are aware of the risks of cigarettes and (2) that perceived risks have a consistent influence on continued smoking behavior. However, research shows that beliefs about smoking may be vulnerable to changes in internal and external contexts.Using ecological momentary assessment, we tested this by measuring how smokers’ (N = 52) beliefs about smoking varied over time. Four times per day over 1 week, participants responded to measures of smoking intentions, risk perceptions, mood and social outcome expectancies, and internal and external contextual factors.We analyzed this data using multilevel modeling, finding that both smoking intentions, risk perceptions, and expectancies differed between participants as well as between moments.Risk perceptions and mood expectancies were a significant predictor of intentions to smoke in the next 30 min, illustrating the importance of these beliefs in decisional processes. This study was preregistered at the Open Science Foundation: https://osf.io/wmv3s/?view_only=71ad66d3ce3845fcb3bf2b9860d820c9. Our analytic plan was not preregistered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The experience of naturally-occurring stress in daily life has been linked with lower physical activity levels. However, most of this evidence comes from general and static reports of stress. Less is known how different temporal components of everyday stress interfere with physical activity. In a coordinated secondary analysis of data from two studies of adults, we used intensive, micro-longitudinal assessments (ecological momentary assessments, EMA) to investigate how distinct components of everyday stress, that is, reactivity to stressor events, recovery from stressor events, and pileup of stressor events and responses predict physical activity. Results showed that components of everyday stress predicted subsequent physical activity especially for indicators of stress pileup. In both studies, the accumulation of stress responses over the previous 12 h was more predictive of subsequent physical activity than current stress reactivity or recovery responses. Results are compared to the effects of general measures of perceived stress that showed an opposite pattern of results. The novel everyday stress approach used here may be fruitful for generating new insights into physical activity specifically and health behaviors in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although stress is a common experience in everyday life, a clear understanding of how often an individual experiences and reports stress is lacking. Notably, there is little information regarding factors that may influence how frequently stress is reported, including which stress dimension is measured (i.e., stressors—did an event happen, subjective stress—how stressed do you feel, conditional stress—how stressful a stressor was) and the temporal features of that assessment (i.e., time of day, day of study, weekday vs. weekend day). The purpose of the present study was to conduct a coordinated analysis of five independent ecological momentary assessment studies utilizing varied stress reporting dimensions and temporal features. Results indicated that, within days, stress was reported at different frequencies depending on the stress dimension. Stressors were reported on 15–32% of momentary reports made within a day; across days, the frequency ranged from 42 to 76% of days. Depending on the cutoff, subjective stress was reported more frequently ranging about 8–56% of all moments within days, and 40–90% of days. Likewise, conditional stress ranged from just 3% of moments to 22%, and 11–69% of days. For the temporal features, stress was reported more frequently on weekdays (compared to weekend days) and on days earlier in the study (relative to days later in the study); time of day was inconsistently related to stress reports. In sum, stress report frequency depends in part on how stress is assessed. As such, researchers may wish to measure stress in multiple ways and, in the case of subjective and conditional stress with multiple operational definitions, to thoroughly characterize the frequency of stress reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]