Exploring the Benefits of an Arts-Based Mindfulness Group Intervention for Youth Experiencing Challenges in Schooling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research exploring the benefits of Mindfulness-Based Interventions (MBIs) with youth is emerging and promising for the improvement of resiliencies. We developed an arts-based mindfulness intervention to make learning mindfulness accessible for children who had experienced trauma. Arts-based methods are engaging, enjoyable, and developmentally relevant. Previously, we found benefits of participating in this MBI for children aged 8 to 12 years. Herein we discuss research in which we explored the benefits of this MBI for adolescents who were experiencing challenges with schooling; 146 youth completed the program. Our research question asked whether the MBI was beneficial and/or effective for these youth and, if so, what were these benefits and how did these benefits assist youth to cope? Benefits were explored via reflexive thematic analysis (TA) of pre/post-intervention, and follow-up individual interviews with youth. Effectiveness was assessed by analyzing pre- and post-intervention scores on youth self-report inventories measuring mindfulness and resilience, as well as responses from caregiver assessments of behavior/coping. To assess if there were changes in responses across timeperiods, a series of repeated measures ANOVA were employed. Quantitative findings were mixed in that the youths’ self-report scores measuring resilience showed limited improvement while mindfulness showed no significant change. However, parents’ perceptions regarding their child’s behaviors indicated significant improvements in social competence and both internalizing/externalizing behaviors. Similarly, the thematic analysis suggested improvements in youths’ self-awareness, self-judgment, thinking, mood, ability to make choices, social skills, coping, and emotion regulation. The results are promising and warrant further investigation of arts-based approaches to facilitating mindfulness with youth.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".