In non-meditating samples, distinct facets of mindfulness are found to be negatively correlated, preventing the meaningful creation of a total mindfulness score. The present study used person-centered analyses to distinguish subgroups of college students based on their mindfulness scores, which allows the examination of individuals who are high (or low) on all facets of mindfulness. Using the Lo-Mendell-Rubin Adjusted LRT test, we settled on a 4-class solution that included a high mindfulness group (high on all 5 facets, N = 245), low mindfulness group (moderately low on all 5 facets, N = 563), judgmentally observing group (high on observing, but low on non-judging and acting with awareness, N =63), and non-judgmentally aware group (low on observing, but high on non-judging and acting with awareness, N =70). Consistent across all emotional outcomes including depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms (i.e., worry), affective instability, and distress intolerance, we found that the judgmentally observing group had the most maladaptive emotional outcomes followed by the low mindfulness group. Both the high mindfulness group and the non-judgmentally aware group had the most adaptive emotional outcomes. We discuss the implications of person-centered analyses to exploring mindfulness as it relates to important psychological health outcomes.

No abstract

There has been an increasing focus on determining the psychological mechanisms underlying the broad effects of mindfulness on psychological health. Mindfulness has been posited to be related to the construct of reperceiving or decentering, defined as a shift in perspective associated with decreased attachment to one’s thoughts and emotions. Decentering is proposed to be a meta-mechanism that mobilizes four psychological mechanisms (cognitive flexibility, values clarification, self-regulation, and exposure), which in turn are associated with positive health outcomes. Despite preliminary support for this model, extant studies testing this model have not examined distinct facets of mindfulness. The present study used a multidimensional measure of mindfulness to examine whether this model could account for the associations between ive facets of mindfulness and psychological symptoms (depressive symptoms, stress, anxiety symptoms, alcohol-related problems) in a sample of college students (N = 944). Our findings partially support this model. We found significant double-mediated associations in the expected directions for all outcomes (stress, anxiety symptoms, and depressive symptoms) except alcohol-related problems, and for each of the facets of mindfulness except observing. However, decentering and the specific mechanisms did not fully mediate the associations among mindfulness facets and psychological health outcomes. Experimental and ecological momentary assessment designs are needed to understand the psychological processes that account for the beneficial effects of mindfulness.

The Self-Rated Level 1 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure was developed to aid in clinical decision-making for clients seeking psychiatric services and to facilitate empirical investigation of the dimensional nature of mental health issues. Preliminary evidence supports its utility with clinical samples. However, the brief, yet comprehensive structure of the Level 1 measure may benefit a high-risk population that is less likely to seek treatment. College students have high rates of hazardous substance use and co-occurring mental health symptoms, yet rarely seek treatment. Therefore, the current study evaluated the psychometric properties (i.e., construct and criterion-related validity) of the Level 1 measure with a large, diverse sample of non-treatment-seeking college/university students. Data from 7,217 college students recruited from 10 universities in 10 different states across the United States evidenced psychometric validation of the Level 1 measure. Specifically, we found acceptable internal consistency across multi-item domains and moderate to strong correlations among domains (internal validity). Further, several domains were positively associated with longer, validated measures of the same mental health construct and had similar strengths of associations with substance use outcomes compared to longer measures of the same construct (convergent validity). Finally, all domains were negatively associated with self-esteem and positively associated with other theoretically relevant constructs, such as posttraumatic stress (criterion-related validity). Taken together, the Level 1 measure appears to be a viable tool for evaluating psychopathology in college students. Several opportunities for clinical application and empirical investigation of the Level 1 measure are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

The present study examined the degree to which morally injurious experiences (MIEs; i.e., atrocities of war, psychological consequences of war, and leadership failure/betrayal) and moral injury (i.e., guilt, shame, difficulties with forgiveness, and withdrawal associated with exposure to MIEs) were associated with symptoms of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suicidality, hazardous alcohol use, and drug abuse symptoms. In addition, we examined moral injury and PTSD symptoms as mediators of the association between MIEs and these outcomes (exploratory model). Participants (n = 244) were a predominantly veterans community-based military sample. Our primary model (i.e., single mediation model) revealed that moral injury mediated associations between two MIEs (i.e., atrocities of war and leadership failure/betrayal) and depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, hazardous alcohol use, and PTSD symptoms. However, our exploratory model (i.e., a dual simultaneous mediation model) revealed that moral injury was not significantly associated with any health outcomes after controlling for the effects of MIE dimensions and PTSD symptoms. Within this model, PTSD symptoms significantly mediated the effects of both atrocities of war MIEs and leadership failure/betrayal MIEs on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, suicidality, and hazardous alcohol use. Findings provide preliminary support for moral injury as a mechanism linking exposure to MIEs to both mental health and hazardous alcohol use. Taken together, moral injury appears to be an important target for intervention among combat military personnel.