Mindfulness as an Alternative for Supporting University Student Mental Health: Cognitive-Emotional and Depressive Self-Criticism Measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increases in university-based mental health problems require alternative mental health programs, applicable to students with elevated psychological risks due to personality traits. This study examined the cognitive-emotional outcomes of a university mindfulness meditation (MM) program and their relationship with Self-Criticism (SC), a personality factor linked to depressive vulnerability. University students (n = 71) were assessed at baseline with the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire (DEQ), a measure of depressive personality traits, and two outcome measures: Profile of Mood States (POMS) and Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI). Students attending the MM program were reassessed for outcomes at 3 follow up assessments over 2 semesters. Repeated measures analyses of variance revealed improved within-subjects effects with large or very large effect sizes for the subsample that completed the MM program (n = 18) on the POMS Tension-Anxiety, POMS Depression, POMS Fatigue, and Anxiety Sensitivity Index. Multiple linear regression using self-criticism as a predictor of change in depressed mood revealed that higher self-criticism predicted greater reductions in POMS Depression. This study provides evidence for MM-related cognitive-emotional benefits, suggesting that students with elevated self-critical traits may derive exceptional benefits evident in greater reductions of depressed mood.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 teacher head, 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".