When Traits Match States: Examining the Associations Between Self-Report Trait and State Mindfulness Following a State Mindfulness Induction

Abstract

Previous research has found inconsistent relationships between trait mindfulness and state mindfulness. To extend previous research, we sought to examine the unique associations between self-report trait mindfulness and state mindfulness by levels of meditation experience (meditation-naïve vs. meditation-experienced) and by mindfulness induction (experimentally induced mindful state vs. control group). We recruited 299 college students (93 with previous mindfulness meditation experience) to participate in an experiment that involved the assessment of five facets of trait mindfulness (among other constructs), followed by a mindfulness induction (vs. control), followed by the assessment of state mindfulness of body and mind. Correlational analyses revealed limited associations between trait mindfulness facets and facets of state mindfulness, and demonstrated that a brief mindfulness exercise focused on bodily sensations and the breath elicited higher state mindfulness of body but not state mindfulness of mind. We found significant interactions such that individuals with previous meditation experience and higher scores on the observing facet of trait mindfulness had the highest levels of state mindfulness of body and mind. Among individuals with meditation experience, the strengths of the associations between observing trait mindfulness and the state mindfulness facets increased with frequency of meditation practice. Some other interactions ran counter to expectations. Overall, the relatively weak associations between trait and state mindfulness demonstrates the need to improve our operationalizations of mindfulness, advance our understanding of how to best cultivate mindfulness, and reappraise the ways in which mindfulness can manifest as a state and as a trait.

Mindful moments: A review of brief, low‐intensity mindfulness meditation and induced mindful states

“…In this study, previous meditation experience did not interact with the mindfulness-based addiction treatment that was delivered; however, it is plausible that previous meditation experience could have a significant impact on the effects of brief meditation. On the other hand, other recent research suggests that there may be rather weak associations between trait mindfulness and induced mindfulness states (Bravo, Pearson, Wilson, & Witkiewitz, 2018). Thus, previous meditation experience and levels of trait mindfulness may moderate the impacts of mindfulness inductions.…”

State Mindfulness Scale (SMS)

“…Moreover, they reported that change in SMS scores was significantly correlated with reductions in anxiety (Beck & Steer, 1990; r = -.569, p < .001); and depression (Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996;r = -.355, p < .05) symptoms. Finally, Bravo et al (2018) found that a brief mindfulness exercise (i.e., focused on bodily sensations and the breath) elicited higher SMS Body sub-scale scores (F(1,297) = 18.39, p < .001, partial η 2 = .06), but not SMS Mind sub-scale scores (F(1,297) = 1.14, p = .29, partial η 2 = .00).…”

“…Likewise, participants who reported that they practiced meditation "weekly" or "almost every day" displayed higher SMS scores compared those who practiced "sometimes", had only "tried" meditation, or had never practiced (t93 = 2.64, p = .01, d = .543). Bravo et al (2018) found that:…”

“…This may be largely a byproduct of the limited number of measures of state mindfulness available and the relatively limited use of these measures to study state mindfulness to-date. Nevertheless, we mention here that, with respect to trait mindfulness, associations between SMS scores and measures of dispositional or trait mindfulness (e.g., FFMQ sub-scales, MAAS) have been explored both as evidence of convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity (Bravo et al, 2018;Tanay & Bernstein, 2013).…”

“…ValidityValidation in Different Populations. The SMS has to-date been studied and demonstrated reliability amongst a number of population groups: (a) college and university students (e.g.,Hussein, Egan, & Mantzios, 2017, α = .92 preand .94 post-mindfulness intervention); (b) adults and young adults from the general community (e.g.,Koval & Todaman, 2015, α = .95; Roche, Barrachina, & Fernández, 2016, α = .95); (c) meditation-naïve participants and/or experienced meditators (e.g.,Bravo, Pearson, Wilson, & Witkiewitz, 2018, SMS-Body α = .88, SMS-Mind α = .94); (d) participants engaged in mindfulness training or mindfulnessbased intervention (e.g., Calma-Birling & Gurung, 2017, SMS Total α = .94; Jislin-Goldberg,Tanay, & Bernstein, 2012, α = .92, one-month test-retest reliability r = .52, one-week test-retest reliability measured immediately following weekly mindfulness meditation sessions r = .72;Kohlenberg et al, 2015, α = .86); and (e) multiple specific population groups and sub-groups such as adults exposed to recent traumatic (e.g.,Nitzan-Assayag et al, 2017), and deprived and STATE MINDFULNESS SCALE (SMS) 11 non-deprived daily cigarette smokers (e.g.,Luberto & McLeish, 2018, α = .91 and .95, before and after a 10-minute sitting meditation exercise, respectively;Paz, Zvielli, Goldstein, & Bernstein, 2017). Importantly, as a state measure of mindfulness, it has been studied among meditation-naïve adults in the context of mindfulness meditation specifically (see above), in controlled lab settings, in response to mindfulness interventions or experimental manipulations of present moment attention and awareness (e.g.,Allirot et al, 2017; e.g., Hadash, Segev, Tanay, Goldstein, & Bernstein, 2016), as well as in daily living (e.g.,Pryss et al, 2018;Shoham et al, 2017).…”