Is Informal Practice Associated with Outcomes in Loving-Kindness and Compassion Training? Evidence from Pre-Post and Daily Diary Assessments
Qiang Xie, Kevin M. Riordan, Scott A. Baldwin, Otto Simonsson, Matthew J. Hirshberg, Cortland J. Dahl, Inbal Nahum‐Shani, Richard J. Davidson, Simon B. Goldberg
February 10, 2023 preprint DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/a4s9m via OpenAlex
Summary
Among clinically distressed adults with no meditation experience who used a smartphone-based loving-kindness and compassion training program for two weeks, those who increased their informal meditation practice (using techniques outside formal sessions) showed greater reductions in psychological distress and loneliness from before to after the intervention, though no changes in empathy or prosociality were observed. Daily analyses indicated that more informal practice on a given day predicted lower distress the next day, but not lower loneliness. Distress and loneliness did not predict subsequent informal practice. The findings suggest that informal practice may play a causal role in reducing distress, but further experimental studies are needed.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Observational cohort with longitudinal and daily assessments |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 351 |
| Population | Clinically distressed meditation-naïve adults |
| Duration | 2-week intervention |
| Topics | Meditation |
| Keywords | Loneliness Empathy Clinical psychology |
| Citations | 2 |
| Key finding | Higher daily informal meditation practice was associated with decreased next-day psychological distress, but not with decreased loneliness, empathy, or prosociality. |
Abstract
We investigated whether informal meditation practice (i.e., engagement of meditative techniques outside a period of formal meditation) was associated with outcomes in smartphone-based loving-kindness and compassion training. Clinically distressed meditation-naïve participants (n = 351) completed measures of psychological distress, loneliness, empathy, and prosociality at baseline and following a two-week intervention. Informal practice, psychological distress, and loneliness were also assessed daily. Steeper increases in informal practice were correlated with pre-post improvements in distress (r = -.18, p = .008) and loneliness (r = -.19, p = .009) but not empathy or prosociality. Using a currently recommended analytic approach for establishing cross-lagged effects in longitudinal data (latent curve model with structured residuals), higher current-day informal practice was associated with decreased next-day distress but not decreased next-day loneliness. No cross-lagged associations emerged from distress or loneliness to informal practice. Findings suggest that further investigation into a potential causal role of informal practice is warranted. Future studies manipulating informal practice are needed.