Abstract
ObjectivesMindfulness-based interventions have shown effectiveness in reducing risk factors for disordered eating; however, little is known about mechanisms. This online study evaluated two isolated metacognitive components of mindfulness, adopting a decentered or non-judgemental stance towards internal experiences, respectively, for reducing body dissatisfaction and negative affect.MethodsWomen (N = 330, Mage = 25.18, SD = 4.44) viewed appearance-ideal media images before listening to a 5-min audio recording that guided them to (a) distance themselves from their experience (decentering), (b) accept their experience without judgement (non-judgement), or (c) rest (active control). Participants reported state body dissatisfaction and negative affect at baseline, post-media exposure, and final assessment. Trait measurements (weight and shape concerns, mindfulness, emotion regulation) were assessed as potential moderators. Participants self-reported engagement and acceptability.ResultsAll groups reported significant reductions in body dissatisfaction and negative affect following the recording (d = 0.15–0.38, p < 0.001), with no between-group differences. Trait measurements did not moderate effects.ConclusionsThe results suggest rest was as effective as the metacognitive components in ameliorating immediate negative impacts of appearance-related threats. Alternatively, coping strategies spontaneously adopted by the control group may have supplied temporary relief. Findings highlight the importance of including suitable control; further research should investigate when and for whom specific aspects of mindfulness-based interventions may be particularly helpful.
Highlights
This study evaluated two metacognitive components of mindfulness focused on adopting a decentered or non-judgemental stance towards experience, respectively, in the context of reducing risk factors for disordered eating
While it is possible that improvements reflect an effect of time since media exposure, which would indicate none of the techniques were effective, improvements in body dissatisfaction in the current study (Mchange = 4.82, SD = 29.37) were greater than those from a no-intervention control condition (Mchange = 3.42, SD = 29.62) reported in previous research using a similar experimental paradigm (Atkinson & Wade, 2012)
Our robust methodology, which improved upon the thoughtimmersion control by not encouraging a strategy that has been shown to worsen body dissatisfaction (Naumann et al, 2016), may have resulted in smaller between-group differences that require larger sample sizes to detect
Summary
Participants were 330 women recruited via advertisements on online research platforms and social media. Inclusion criteria were identifying as women and aged 16–35. Participants were aged 18–35 (M = 25.18, SD = 4.44), with self-reported body mass index (BMI) between 15.45 and 49.92 (M = 24.18, SD = 5.64), and identified primarily as White (78.8%). An a priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power (version 3.1.3; Faul et al, 2009) based on the effect size obtained by Atkinson and Wade (2012) in which brief acceptance was associated with greater improvements in appearance satisfaction than a no-intervention control (Cohen’s d = 0.38). Using an independent samples design to detect a difference in final appearance dissatisfaction between an experimental and control group, an acceptable power of 0.80 with an alpha of 0.05 required a sample size of 110 per group
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
