MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965949005 · doi:10.1080/17439760.2011.577089

Are positive psychology exercises helpful for people with depressive personality styles?

2011· article· en· W1965949005 on OpenAlex
Susan Sergeant, Myriam Mongrain

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Positive Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratitudePsychologyHappinessWell-beingIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyPositive psychologySelf-esteemPersonalityDepression (economics)Developmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Two exercises involving gratitude and uplifting music were tested for their ability to improve well-being in self-critical and needy individuals. In this study, 772 adults completed measures of depressive symptoms, physical symptoms, happiness, and self-esteem and then practiced the gratitude, music, or control exercise (recalling early childhood memories) for 1 week. Follow-up measures were administered after the intervention period, and 1, 3, and 6 months later. Participants in both the gratitude and the music condition reported greater increases in happiness over time than participants in the control condition. Self-critics were particularly responsive to the gratitude intervention, whereas needy individuals found the exercises ineffective and even detrimental to their self-esteem. These results highlight the importance of identifying individual differences in response to positive psychology exercises. Keywords: positive psychologyself-criticismneedinesswell-being Notes 1. Due to concern over the effects of payment on participant outcomes, this variable was controlled for in all analyses. 2. Items loading onto the efficacy factor involve the endorsement of a sense of confidence about personal resources and capacities rather than symptoms of depression. Since this study is concerned primarily with investigating vulnerabilities to depression, efficacy scores were not analyzed. 3. SC and Neediness were entered as continuous variables and interpreted as such throughout. 4. To determine if depressive symptoms predicted changes in well-being, baseline score on the CES-D was also explored as a potential predictor variable for the other three dependent measures. Using the same analytic strategy as the one used for SC and neediness, CES-D scores did not significantly interact with the exercise effects on well-being over time. Thus, participants' baseline level of depressive symptomology was not an important predictor of the effectiveness of the exercises. 5. All the analyses were also run for the data including only the baseline and 1-week post-test measures to explore whether there were any immediate effects of the exercises that may have dissipated over the long-term. For brevity's sake, these analyses are not reported here in detail. However, the 1-week effects were generally consistent with the long-term effects, and several new group differences emerged that reinforced the notion that self-critics fared significantly better in the gratitude condition.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it