Sustained Benefits of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy on Emotion Recognition and Mind-Body Connection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) on enhancing emotion recognition and strengthening the mind-body connection. A randomized controlled trial design was employed with 30 participants randomly assigned to either an intervention group (ACT) or a control group, each consisting of 15 participants. The intervention group underwent eight 60-minute ACT sessions over eight weeks, while the control group received no intervention. Data were collected at three time points: baseline, post-intervention, and four-month follow-up, using the Emotion Recognition Questionnaire (ERQ) and the Mindful Awareness and Body Connection Scale (MABC). Data analysis involved repeated measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc tests, conducted using SPSS-27. Significant improvements were observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. For the intervention group, the mean ERQ score increased from 58.40 (SD = 6.85) at baseline to 72.30 (SD = 5.90) post-intervention, and slightly decreased to 70.50 (SD = 6.20) at follow-up. In contrast, the control group showed no significant changes, with mean ERQ scores of 57.90 (SD = 7.10) at baseline, 58.60 (SD = 6.95) post-intervention, and 57.80 (SD = 7.00) at follow-up. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant effects for group (F(1, 28) = 15.76, p < .001), time (F(2, 56) = 20.78, p < .001), and the interaction between time and group (F(2, 56) = 15.26, p < .001). Bonferroni post-hoc tests confirmed significant improvements in the intervention group from baseline to post-intervention (mean difference = -13.90, p < .001) and baseline to follow-up (mean difference = -12.10, p < .001). ACT significantly enhances emotion recognition and strengthens the mind-body connection. These improvements are sustained over time, highlighting ACT's potential as an effective intervention for these psychological domains.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".