The Effect of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) on Emotional Flexibility and Ambivalence Over Emotional Expression in Divorced Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The present study was developed to evaluate the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) on the level of emotional flexibility and ambivalence related to emotional expression of divorced women. A general community sample of 30 divorced women was recruited and randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The experimental group received MBSR for 8 weeks, and the control group was placed on a waiting list. The Emotional Flexibility Questionnaire (EFQ) and the Ambivalence Over the Expression of Emotion Questionnaire (AEQ) were administered to both groups before (pre) and after (post) the treatment. Data were analyzed using two-way mixed repeated-measures analyses of variance. The results showed that women in the treatment group had a significant increase in the total score of the EFQ and its components. In addition, the MBSR group had a significant decrease in the total score of the AEQ and its components. MBSR intervention shows potential for use with divorced women to help with emotion regulation and subsequent better adjustment to separation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".