Combining PPI Domains and Targeting Cognitive Mechanisms: A Failed Proof-of-Concept for PPI Research

Bryant M. Stone, David G. Gilbert
{"title":"Combining PPI Domains and Targeting Cognitive Mechanisms: A Failed Proof-of-Concept for PPI Research","authors":"Bryant M. Stone, David G. Gilbert","doi":"10.1007/s41042-023-00118-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Positive psychological interventions (PPIs) are activities that target positive variables (e.g., gratitude or kindness) to elicit a positive response in a population, such as improving adaptive functioning, promoting well-being, reducing depression, or enhancing quality of life. Despite several decades of evidence, a meta-analysis by White et al. (2019) concluded that the effect sizes of PPIs may be smaller than previously recorded and that their effects on depression may be generally nonsignificant. In the current study, we created a new PPI, called the Best-Self PPI (BS-PPI), to provide a proof-of-concept of two relatively unexplored properties of PPIs that may enhance effect sizes, which are: (1) combining PPI domains (i.e., multiple targeted positive variables) into a single intervention and (2) designing PPIs to target cognitive mechanisms of change. Using a double-masked procedure, we randomly assigned undergraduate students (n = 133) between the ages of 18 and 32 (Mage = 19.97, SD = 1.66; women; n = 85, 63.9%; White: n = 87, 65.41%) to complete either the BS-PPI – containing elements of meaning, character strengths, and optimism – or a control condition before completing measures of depression, psychological well-being, and affect. One day later, the participants completed a measure of affect and the Self-Referential Encoding Task, a behavioral measure of self-referential processing bias, which is the strength and the valance of the words one uses to describe oneself, to test the potential of targeting a cognitive mechanism of change. One week later, participants completed measures of depression, psychological well-being, and affect. The results suggest the BS-PPI did not affect depression, well-being, or affect compared to the control group despite the consistency of this study with many other PPI studies (e.g., sample size, design, and population), which aligns with the White et al. (2019) meta-analysis. We discuss the implications of this failed proof-of-concept for PPI research and recommendations for moving forward with these relatively unexplored properties.","PeriodicalId":73424,"journal":{"name":"International journal of applied positive psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of applied positive psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-023-00118-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Positive psychological interventions (PPIs) are activities that target positive variables (e.g., gratitude or kindness) to elicit a positive response in a population, such as improving adaptive functioning, promoting well-being, reducing depression, or enhancing quality of life. Despite several decades of evidence, a meta-analysis by White et al. (2019) concluded that the effect sizes of PPIs may be smaller than previously recorded and that their effects on depression may be generally nonsignificant. In the current study, we created a new PPI, called the Best-Self PPI (BS-PPI), to provide a proof-of-concept of two relatively unexplored properties of PPIs that may enhance effect sizes, which are: (1) combining PPI domains (i.e., multiple targeted positive variables) into a single intervention and (2) designing PPIs to target cognitive mechanisms of change. Using a double-masked procedure, we randomly assigned undergraduate students (n = 133) between the ages of 18 and 32 (Mage = 19.97, SD = 1.66; women; n = 85, 63.9%; White: n = 87, 65.41%) to complete either the BS-PPI – containing elements of meaning, character strengths, and optimism – or a control condition before completing measures of depression, psychological well-being, and affect. One day later, the participants completed a measure of affect and the Self-Referential Encoding Task, a behavioral measure of self-referential processing bias, which is the strength and the valance of the words one uses to describe oneself, to test the potential of targeting a cognitive mechanism of change. One week later, participants completed measures of depression, psychological well-being, and affect. The results suggest the BS-PPI did not affect depression, well-being, or affect compared to the control group despite the consistency of this study with many other PPI studies (e.g., sample size, design, and population), which aligns with the White et al. (2019) meta-analysis. We discuss the implications of this failed proof-of-concept for PPI research and recommendations for moving forward with these relatively unexplored properties.
结合PPI领域和目标认知机制:一个失败的PPI研究概念验证
积极心理干预(PPIs)是针对积极变量(如感恩或善良)的活动,以引起人群的积极反应,如改善适应功能,促进福祉,减少抑郁或提高生活质量。尽管有几十年的证据,White等人(2019)的荟萃分析得出的结论是,ppi的效应量可能比以前记录的要小,而且它们对抑郁症的影响可能通常不显著。在目前的研究中,我们创建了一种新的PPI,称为最佳自我PPI (BS-PPI),以提供PPI的两个相对未被探索的特性的概念证明,这些特性可能会增强效应大小,它们是:(1)将PPI域(即多个目标积极变量)结合到单一干预中;(2)设计PPI以目标改变的认知机制为目标。采用双屏蔽程序,我们随机分配了年龄在18至32岁之间的本科生(n = 133) (Mage = 19.97, SD = 1.66;女性;N = 85, 63.9%;White: n = 87, 65.41%),在完成抑郁、心理健康和情感测量之前,完成BS-PPI(包含意义、性格优势和乐观主义元素)或对照条件。一天后,参与者完成了情感测量和自我参照编码任务,这是一项自我参照加工偏差的行为测量,即一个人用来描述自己的词语的强度和价值,以测试以认知改变机制为目标的潜力。一周后,参与者完成了抑郁、心理健康和情感的测量。结果表明,与对照组相比,BS-PPI不影响抑郁、幸福感或影响,尽管该研究与许多其他PPI研究(例如样本量、设计和人群)一致,这与White等人(2019)的荟萃分析一致。我们讨论了这一失败的概念验证对PPI研究的影响,并建议进一步研究这些相对未开发的特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信