Implicitly Activating Mindfulness Promotes Positive Responses Following an Ego Threat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across three studies, we investigated the emotional and cognitive buffering effects of implicitly activating mindfulness in response to an ego threat. Studies 1A (N = 41) and 1B (N = 113) investigated the effects of implicitly activating mindfulness on psychological wellbeing in response to failing an anagrams task. Results showed that, after failing at anagrams, participants in the implicit mindfulness condition reported greater positive affect than those in the control condition. Study 2 (N = 88) investigated the buffering effects of the implicit mindfulness and mindful self-focus exercise on recalling a very negative personal event. Study 2 results again showed the effects on positive affect in addition to showing that participants in the implicit mindfulness condition reported lower negative self-reported physiological arousal and exhibited a lower attentional bias toward negative information. Results also show the potential pitfalls of the mindful self-focus condition in the context of recalling a highly negative event. Together these results highlight how innocuously activating mindfulness may promote positive responses to ego threats.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".