Mindfulness and Affect-Network Density: Does Mindfulness Facilitate Disengagement from Affective Experiences in Daily Life?

Abstract

Objectives Mindfulness has been positively associated with affective well-being, which may be explained by improved affective disengagement from prior experiences. Methods We used a dynamic network approach to represent temporal interconnections between specific affective states (i.e., network density)-with less interconnected states indicating better affective disengagement-to investigate whether mindfulness predicted a lower network density. One-hundred twenty-five undergraduate students (M age = 22.87; SD = 5.06 years; 77.6% female) completed a 40-day ambulatory assessment, reporting on their affective experiences and state mindfulness six times a day, and either practiced mindfulness or were on a wait-list (control condition). Results We found that neither the mindfulness training, β = −.11, p = .222, nor state mindfulness, β = −.06, p = .484, were associated with affective network density. However, given prior research indicating the importance of prior meditation experience, we found that participants with prior meditation experience reported lower affective network density when they reported higher state mindfulness than participants without meditation experiences, β = −.20, p = .048. Conclusion The present study found that neither high levels of mindfulness nor a mindfulness training automatically improved affective disengagement in the form of lower network density. Rather, it seems that only those who were already familiar with practicing mindfulness and who were mindful in their daily life experienced easier disengagement from previous affective experiences. These findings may point toward a different, more complex, understanding of mindfulness in experienced meditators.

A single‐blind, randomized, pilot study of a brief mindfulness‐based intervention for the endometriosis‐related pain management

“…It is essential to notice that initial mindfulness training involves applying psychological attitudes whilst relating to internal and external experiences primarily in the controlled context of the formal meditation exercise (Crane et al, 2017). Likely, incorporating mindfulness attitudes as coping strategies to deal with daily living activities and social relationships may require more extensive training (Jackson et al, 2019; Rowland & Wenzel, 2020).…”

Be Kind to Yourself: the Implications of Momentary Self-Compassion for Affective Dynamics and Well-Being in Daily Life

“…Mindfulness research has shown that the skill of acceptance may require more time and training to develop than other mindfulness components, such as mere observational or attentional skills (Baer et al, 2012 ; Desbordes et al, 2014 ). This may also explain why only individuals with prior mindfulness meditation experience (but not novices) seemed to be able to effectively detach from past emotions when being more mindful (Rowland & Wenzel, 2020 ). Thus, the benefits of SC (and mindfulness) on affective detachment may only unfold after significant training and internalization of the importance to fully accept the present moment experience.…”

Equilibrium Causal Models: Connecting Dynamical Systems Modeling and Cross-Sectional Data Analysis

“…Dashed gray lines indicate the true causal effect. mann et al, 2016;Rowland & Wenzel, 2020) typically ask participants the degree to which they current feel anxious multiple times a day, that is, at the moment they received the measurement prompt. In that situation, it is clear that the researchers aim to capture snapshot measurements of some time-varying psychological process.…”

“…Similar comparisons can be made with depressed mood, where experience sampling studies typically query depressed mood levels at the moment of measurement (e.g. Bringmann et al, 2016;Rowland & Wenzel, 2020); cross-sectional studies based on the Beck Depression Index or DSMcriteria ask participants to assess their depressed mood over the past week, two weeks or the past 30 days (e.g., Alegria et al, 2007;Beck et al, 1987;Fried et al, 2016;Kendler et al, 2018); while still other cross-sectional studies assess stable levels of depressed mood using measures designed to assess trait positive and negative affect (e.g., Clark & Watson, 1991;Watson, Clark, et al, 1994). This already gives some indication that the (perhaps implicit) measurement model being used by empirical researchers in cross-sectional settings may be closer to that of equilibrium measurements than that of snapshot measurements.…”