Examining the Mindfulness – Stress Resistance Relation: The Mediational Role of Autonomy

Abstract

EXAMINING THE MINDFULNESS – STRESS RESISTANCE RELATION: THE MEDIATIONAL ROLE OF AUTONOMY By Melissa P. Holt, B.S. A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science at Virginia Commonwealth University. Virginia Commonwealth University, 2009 Major Director: Kirk Warren Brown, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology Mindfulness – a receptive attentiveness to present experience – has been shown to promote more adaptive emotion regulation (Brown, et al. 2007) and predict autonomy motivation to behave in a self-directed manner. In turn, autonomy has been shown to predict self-regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). This suggests a psychological pathway from mindfulness to autonomy to emotion regulation. To better understand the regulatory potential of a mindful disposition and the possible mediating role of autonomy in healthy adult participants (N = 69), a laboratory social evaluative threat was used called the Trier Social Stress Task (Kirschbaum, et al., 1993). Results showed that mindfulness predicted lower self-reported anxiety but not lower negative affect or endocrine levels. State autonomy during the stressor fully mediated the inverse relation between mindfulness and anxiety. These results support the theory of the emotion regulatory potential of mindfulness, and suggest one means by which this quality may improve well-being. Introduction Stress, a psychological and physiological reaction to challenging or threatening stimuli, has become ubiquitous in the modern world. While stress serves the important purpose of alerting individuals to potential harm or threats in the environment (Selye, 1936) the evolved human capacity to ruminate, worry, and plan for future events can heighten and prolong stress in the face of – or even the absence of – environmental challenges and threats. There is general consensus that stress manifests both psychologically and physiologically (Chida & Hamer, 2008). There is also now widespread recognition that cognitive appraisals, or interpretations of potentially stressful events (as most basically, good, bad, or neutral), are key to determining whether stress and the consequences of it will accrue (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). This current understanding of the importance of cognitive appraisals is based on Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) influential research detailing the differences between primary and secondary appraisals of stressful events. Primary appraisals are defined as how individuals initially interpret a stimulus as either a threat or a challenge (or as benign). Secondary appraisals involve self-assessments concerning the adequacy of physical, social, and psychological resources at hand to cope with a primary appraised stressor. Research on coping is now well established (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004). A currently active area of stress research seeks to uncover key factors, such as social support (Harvey, Burns, Fahy, et al, 2001) and personality (O'Brien & DeLongis, 1996), that influence whether events are