Mindful acceptance dampens neuroaffective reactions to external and rewarding performance feedback.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research on mindfulness has suggested that individuals high in trait mindfulness show heightened sensitivity to visceral and internally generated stimuli. However, when mindful individuals are exposed to external stimuli-such as pictures or faces-their emotional responses are typically attenuated. In the current study, we tested how trait mindfulness relates to reactivity in response to a different type of external stimulus, namely, performance feedback. Using electroencephalography, we recorded participants' neuroaffective reactions to rewarding, aversive, and neutral feedback, as indexed by the feedback-related negativity (FRN). The FRN is a brain response that peaks approximately 250 ms after feedback presentation, and it is thought to differentiate feedback indicating favorable versus unfavorable outcomes. Our findings suggest trait mindfulness predicts less differentiation of rewarding from neutral feedback, but does not predict brain differentiation of aversive from neutral feedback. This was the case particularly for individuals who scored highly on the "acceptance" facet of mindfulness, a facet that assesses the nonjudgmental acceptance of thoughts and emotions. We discuss the implications of these findings for current theory on mindfulness and emotion regulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".