The goal of this clinical trial was to examine the effects of Loving-Kindness Meditation (LKM) on anhedonic depressivity, interpersonal relationships (other inclusive self-concept, willingness to sacrifice, interaction quality) and emotions (positive affect, negative affect). The second aim was to conduct exploratory analyses investigating potential mediators that help explain changes in anhedonic depressivity over the course of short-term targeted LKM. Participants were randomly assigned to receive one week of \~5-minute daily audio recordings of Loving-Kindness Meditation or a visualization meditation, both of which were focused on a same-gender close friend. Participants completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires measuring psychological, social, and emotional variables; participants also completed daily questionnaires.
Undergraduate women were recruited via the Queen's University psychology department's subject pool (n = 222) and online advertisements (i.e., Facebook; n = 18) in 2021; written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to any data collection. We randomly assigned participants-via Microsoft Excel random number generation-to engage in one-week of either a targeted form of Loving-Kindness Meditation or a visualization meditation. Participants identified a specific close friend at the beginning of the study to be the target of their meditation practice. They completed baseline and one-week follow-up measures. Audio instructions for the LKM and visualization meditation conditions were developed for this study based on those used by Seppala et al. (2014). Recordings were delivered via email. Descriptions of the conditions can be found in the Arms and Interventions sections.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
240
Participants received a \~5 minute audio recording of Loving-Kindness Meditation Instructions everday for one week. Recordings were delivered via email. Meditators in both conditions were instructed to find a comfortable position, either sitting or lying down, and were then guided through some initial deep breathing. Once relaxed, meditators in the LKM condition were asked to imagine receiving love and wishes of well-being from a close other; they were then asked to direct feelings of love and wishes of wellness to their target close friend. After approximately 5 minutes, meditators were guided back to relaxation.
Participants received a \~5 minute audio recording of visualization Instructions everday for one week. Recordings were delivered via email. Meditators in both conditions were instructed to find a comfortable position, either sitting or lying down, and were then guided through some initial deep breathing. Meditators in the visualization condition were asked to visualize specific details of their target close friend's appearance. After approximately 5 minutes, meditators were guided back to relaxation.
Queen's University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Anhedonic Depressivity
The anhedonic depression scale of the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire (MASQ; Clark \& Watson, 1991) was used to measure anhedonic depressivity. Participants rated items of the MASQ (Clark \& Watson, 1991) on a scale from 1-5 (1 = Not at All; 5 = Extremely) based on how they felt over the past week. The anhedonic depression subscale includes 22 items (e.g., "Felt like there wasn't anything interesting or fun to do"). A mean score was calculated, with higher scores indicating more anhedonic depressivity.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Positive Affect
The Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988) was used to measure positive affect. The PANAS consists of 20 emotion words divided into two subscales (10 positive words and 10 negative words). Participants rate each emotion word on a scale from 1-5 (1 = Very Slightly or Not at All; 5 = Extremely) corresponding to how they have been feeling over the past week. The positive affect subscale contains emotion words such as: "Interested," "Excited," and "Inspired." A mean score was calculated for use in data analyses, with higher scores indicating greater positive affect.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Willingness to Sacrifice
The willingness to sacrifice scale is a two-item measure adapted from the Marburg Attitude Inventory for Styles of Loving (Bierhoff et al., 1993). Participants are asked to respond to the following questions on a scale from 1-10 (1 = Not at all; 10 = Entirely): "To what extent would you be willing to sacrifice your own desires for your close friend's desires?"; and "To what extent would you leave everything else aside for your close friend?". At baseline and follow-up, participants responded to these questions based on the previous week. For each administration, a mean score was calculated for use in data analyses.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Other-Inclusive Self Concept
The Inclusion of the Other in the Self Scale (IOS; Aron et al., 1992) is a one item measure composed of seven images of two increasingly overlapping circles labeled "self" and "other". Other-inclusive self-concept was measured with a modified IOS by asking participants to think about their relationship with their chosen close friend over the past week and to indicate the diagram that best matched their perceived connection. The IOS has convergent validity (Aron et al., 1992; Gächter et al., 2015) and discriminant validity (Aron et al., 1992) in relation to other established interpersonal closeness measures.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Interaction Quality
A modified version of the Rochester Interaction Record (M-RIR; based on Wheeler \& Reis, 1991) was used to measure interaction quality. The M-RIR asks participants to rate, from 1-7, the degree to which their interactions with their close other: 1) were intimate (1 = superficial; 7 = meaningful); 2) included self/other disclosure (1 = very little; 7 = a great deal); 3) were satisfying (1 = very unsatisfying; 7 = very satisfying); 4) were loving (1 = not at all loving; 7 = very loving); 5) were supportive (1 = not at all supportive; 7 = very supportive); and 6) were stressful (1 = not at all stressful; 7 = very stressful; reverse coded). At baseline and follow-up, participants completed the M-RIR for the past week. A mean score was calculated for use in data analyses, with higher scores indicating greater interaction quality.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Anxious Arousal
The anxious arousal subscale of the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire (MASQ; Clark \& Watson, 1991) was used to measure anxious arousal. Participants rated items of the MASQ (Clark \& Watson, 1991) on a scale from 1-5 (1 = Not at All; 5 = Extremely) based on how they felt over the past week. The anxious arousal subscale includes 17 items (e.g., "Was trembling or shaking"). For each subscale, a mean score was calculated, with higher scores indicating more anxious arousal.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Negative Affect
The Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson et al., 1988) was used to measure negative affect. The PANAS consists of 20 emotion words divided into two subscales (10 positive words and 10 negative words). Participants rate each emotion word on a scale from 1-5 (1 = Very Slightly or Not at All; 5 = Extremely) corresponding to how they have been feeling over the past week. The negative affect subscale contains emotion words such as "Hostile", "Irritable", and "Ashamed'". A mean score was calculated for use in data analyses, with higher scores indicating greater negative affect.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Emotional Closeness
Emotional closeness was measured using a modified 10-item version of the Emotional Closeness Questionnaire (ECQ; Flores \& Berenbaum, 2012, 2014). The ECQ presents participants with 10 statements that reflect aspects of emotional closeness (e.g., "my friend gave me emotional support", "I shared my personal thoughts or feelings with my friend"). Respondents rate the degree each of these statements happened over the past week on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). Scores from each question are averaged to create an overall score with higher scores indicating higher levels of emotional closeness (Flores \& Berenbaum, 2012, 2014). This questionnaire was modified to ask respondents to specifically consider the close other they chose at the beginning of the study.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Desired Emotional Closeness
Desired emotional closeness was measured using a modified 10-item version of the Emotional Closeness Questionnaire (ECQ; Flores \& Berenbaum, 2012, 2014). The D-ECQ presents participants with 5 statements that reflect aspects of emotional closeness (e.g., "my friend gives me emotional support", "I share my personal thoughts or feelings with my friend"). Respondents rate the degree to which they would have liked each of these statements to have happened over the past week on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). Scores from each question are averaged to create an overall score with higher scores indicating a higher desire for emotional closeness (Flores \& Berenbaum, 2012, 2014). This questionnaire was modified to ask respondents to specifically consider the close other they chose at the beginning of the study.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
Worry
The Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ; Meyer et al., 1990) was used to measure worry. The PSWQ asks participants to rate the degree to which 16 statements related to worry are typical or characteristic of them (e.g., "My worries overwhelm me", "Once I start worrying, I can't stop"). Respondents rate each item on a scale from 1 (not at all typical) to 5 (very typical; Meyer et al., 1990). A mean score was generated for each participant with higher scores indicating higher levels of worry.
Time frame: Assessed once at baseline (Day 0) and once at follow-up after the intervention (follow up sent on Day 8).
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.