Exploring self‐compassion and empathy in the context of mindfulness‐based stress reduction (MBSR)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mindfulness‐based stress reduction (MBSR) programmes have demonstrated beneficial outcomes in a variety of populations. Self‐compassion and empathy have theoretical connections to mindfulness, the key element of the MBSR programme; however, previous studies examining the programme's impact on self‐compassion or empathy have demonstrated mixed results. This study examined the impact of MBSR on self‐compassion and empathy, as well as on mindfulness, symptoms of stress, mood disturbance and spirituality in a community sample. Significant reductions in symptoms of stress and mood disturbance, as well as increases in mindfulness, spirituality and self‐compassion were observed after programme participation. With regards to empathy, a significant increase was seen in perspective taking and a significant decrease in personal distress; no significant change was observed for empathic concern. Changes in self‐compassion were predicted by changes in mindfulness. Self‐compassion and aspects of empathy revealed strong associations with psychological functioning. Implications of MBSR as an intervention for enhancing self‐compassion and empathy are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".