Mindfulness and positive activities at work: Intervention effects on motivation‐related constructs, sleep quality, and fatigue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Positive psychology research is increasingly being transferred to organizational contexts, and organizations are increasingly striving for healthier and more motivated employees. In this study, a three‐week self‐instructed online intervention which combines positive activities and mindfulness was developed and evaluated using a randomized‐controlled group design with employees. All exercises could be easily integrated into the daily working routine. The intervention is based on broaden‐and‐build theory, the two‐component model of mindfulness and the positive‐activity model. Results indicate that the intervention is effective in increasing work engagement, hope and sleep quality as well as in reducing fatigue. Practical implications for human resource departments and corporate health management are discussed. Practitioner points A three‐week mindfulness intervention can increase work engagement, hope, sleep quality, and reduce fatigue. Such activities can easily be integrated into the workday and thus, represent a realistic way for employees to improve motivation and reduce health impairment.
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) | 0.003 | 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".