Changes in positive affect and mindfulness predict changes in cortisol response and psychiatric symptoms: A latent change score modelling approach

Abstract

The levels of post-stress recovery from anxiety symptoms could depend on concurrent increases in positive affect and mindfulness, whereas the levels of post-stress decline in cortisol secretion could depend on increases in mindfulness both during and after stress. Directions for translating the present findings into stress management programmes in college settings are discussed.

Threat to democracy: Physical and mental health impact of democracy movement in Hong Kong

“…Despite the possibility that social protests could create resource passageways, they also have the power of depleting internal and external resources, which has central impact on the citizens' psychological and physical well-being. Preventing depletion of these resources is key for maintaining healthy functioning (Hobfoll, 1998;Hobfoll et al, 2009;Hou and Lam, 2014;Hou et al, 2010aHou et al, , 2010bHou et al, , 2015. In Cairo, Egypt, citizens who were injured in political demonstrations reported higher levels of psychiatric symptoms than patients who experienced physical trauma from other causes.…”

Do I really feel better? Effectiveness of emotion regulation strategies depends on the measure and social anxiety

“…We selected and preregistered the operationalization of change in affect described above because it has grounding in the literature (e.g., Hou et al, ) and because it most closely mirrors the phenomenon that we were interested in capturing (i.e., how much a person's affect improves/worsens after reported use of an ER strategy). However, we recognize that there are many different ways one could calculate an affect change score.…”

“…Following Castro-Schilo and Grimm (2017), difference scores were calculated because when there are pre-existing group differences in baseline scores on the dependent variable (which seemed plausible given trait-level social anxiety symptoms are not randomly assigned), difference scores models are less biased than other common analytic alternatives (i.e., residualized change scores). We selected and preregistered the operationalization of change in affect described above because it has grounding in the literature (e.g., Hou et al, 2015) and because it most closely mirrors the phenomenon that we were interested in capturing (i.e., how much a person's affect improves/ worsens after reported use of an ER strategy). However, we recognize that there are many different ways one could calculate an affect change score.…”

“…Notably, while EMA is well‐suited to the study of short‐term ER effectiveness in daily life, both within and across individuals (e.g., Aldao, ), researchers differ in how they use EMA self‐reports to measure this outcome. ER effectiveness has been measured through: the perceived impact of reported strategies on mood and through changes in in‐the‐moment mood reports (Heiy & Cheavens, ); degree of positive emotions experienced each day, given the relative use of certain ER strategies the previous day (Farmer & Kashdan, ); severity of daily social anxiety symptoms endorsed as a function of daily ER strategy use (Kashdan et al, ); and changes to positive and negative affect following an exam (Hou, Ng, & Wan, ). While each of the above measures presumably tap some facet of ER effectiveness, it is possible that these different approaches may lead to inconsistent conclusions about the relative effectiveness of a given strategy, making it difficult to integrate findings across studies that operationalize ER effectiveness differently.…”

“…changes in in-the-moment mood reports (Heiy & Cheavens, 2014); degree of positive emotions experienced each day, given the relative use of certain ER strategies the previous day (Farmer & Kashdan, 2014); severity of daily social anxiety symptoms endorsed as a function of daily ER strategy use ; and changes to positive and negative affect following an exam (Hou, Ng, & Wan, 2015). While each of the above measures presumably tap some facet of ER effectiveness, it is possible that these different approaches may lead to inconsistent conclusions about the relative effectiveness of a given strategy, making it difficult to integrate findings across studies that operationalize ER effectiveness differently.…”