EffectsofMindfulnessMeditationon
EmotionalReactivityandSelf‐
AssociationwithEmotionalStimuli
AkashJagannathan
2013‐2013
2
1.Introduction
1.1Self‐ReferentialProcessing
Anintegralpartofhumanexperienceisthefeelingof“self”–asenseofawareness
ofone’sownbeing.Variousphilosophicalandreligioustraditionshavegivendifferent
descriptionsofthetruenatureoftheself.Oneviewclaimstheexistenceofaneternal,
unchanging“soul”thatiscarriedthroughoutone’slife(Goetz&Taliferro2011).Another
viewclaimstheexistenceofnoinherentself–ratherjustaconstantfluxofimpersonal
psychologicalandphysicalprocessesthatwemistakenlyidentifywith(Ho1995).
Behavioralscientistshavedefinedvariousexperiencesof“self.”Onetypeof
experienceischaracterizedasrelativelystableandcontinuousacrosstime,andconsistsof
anarrativeofone’slifewithpastexperiencesandfutureexpectationsbeingwoven
togetherintoonecohesiveframework.Thisisknownas“narrative”self‐reference(Farb
2007)orconceptualself‐view(Goldin2009).Anotherexperienceischaracterizedby
moment‐to‐momentawarenessofone’sphysicalandmentalstates.Knownasmomentary
self‐reference(Farb2007),one’sattentioniscenteredinthecontentsofpresentmoment
experience.
1.1.2“Narrative”Self‐Reference
Neuroscientistshavefoundseveralregionsmediating“narrative”self‐reference
experience–stringingdisparateexperiencestogethertocreateacoherentnarrative‐
locatedinthecorticalmidlinestructuresinthefrontalmedialareaofthecortex(Northoff
2006).Theseregions,specificallytheventralanddorsalmedialprefrontalcortices(mPFC)
andaregionspanningfromtheposteriorcingulatecortextotheprecuneus(Goldin2009)
areconsideredresponsibleforthistypeofself‐view
Positiveandnegativeconsequenceshavebeenidentifiedinassociationwith
adoptinga“narrative”modeofself‐reference.Positivesincludehigher‐orderexecutive
functionsresponsibleforthesophisticatedcognitionofthehumanspecies,aswellas
complexsocialcognitivefunctionssuchasmentalizing(Farb2007)andformingtheoriesof
minds.However,ithasbeenarguedthatnarrativeself‐viewcontributestonegative
emotionalreactivityanddeficitsinthecognitiveregulationofemotion(Goldin2009).
3
Anothernegativeconsequenceofa“narrative”modeofself‐referenceconcernsthedefault‐
modenetwork(DMN).Thisisanetworkofbrainregionsthatisactivewhenweareawake
butnotfocusedonaspecifictask.Adefault‐modeofbrainactivityiscorrelatedwithmind‐
wandering(Brewer2011)andlowerlevelsofhappiness(Killingsworth&Gilbert2010).
Interestingly,corticalregionsimplicatedintheDMNoverlapwithCMSstructures
associatedwith“narrative”self‐referentialprocessing,includingthemedialprefrontaland
posteriorcingulatecortices(Brewer2011).Onecouldspeculatethatadoptinganarrative
viewofselfisadefaulttendencyofthebrainandmind.
1.1.3“Moment‐to‐moment”self‐reference
Momentaryself‐referenceischaracterizedbypresent‐momentawarenessof
thoughtsandbodilysensations.Ratherthanconnectingtemporallydisparateevents,this
typeofself‐awarenessconsistsofkeepingaconsciousperceptionofeachmomentasit
arisesandpasses.Theneuralcorrelatesofthisself‐referentialmodearearightlateralized
networkincludingthelateralprefrontalcortex,insula,secondarysomatosensorycortex,
andinferiorparietallobule(Farb2007).Inaddition,astudybyFarb2007lookingatthe
neuralcorrelatesofthistypeofself‐awarenessfoundtask‐relatedsuppressionofmidline
corticalrepresentations,verysimilartothosesupportingthedefault‐modenetworkand
“narrative”self‐focus.
1.1.4MeasuringSRP
Self‐referentialprocessingisdifficulttomeasuresinceitissubjective.Therea
numberofdomainsthroughwhichSRPcanbemeasuredindirectly.Astudyconductedby
Goldinetal.in2009lookedatself‐referentialprocessingintheverbaldomainfor
individualsdiagnosedwithSocialAnxietyDisorder.BeforeandafterMBSR(mindfulness‐
basedstressreduction)training,individualsweregiventraitadjectivesandaskedtorate
howmuchthesedescribedthemselves.ResultsshowedthatafterMBSR,lessnegativetrait
adjectivesandmorepositivetraitadjectiveswereself‐endorsed.However,theauthorsof
thisstudystatedamoreecologicallyvalidmethodofmeasuringself‐referentialprocessing
isneeded.
AnotherdomaininwhichSRPcanbemeasuredistheemotionaldomain.AfMRI
studyconductedbyPhanetal.in2004involvedparticipantsbeingpresentedasequenceof
emotionalpicturesfromtheInternationalAffectivePictureSystem(IAPS)andaskedto
4
maketwojudgments:1)howunpleasantorpleasanteachpicturemakesthemfeeland2)
theextenttowhichtheyrelateorassociatethemselveswitheachpicture.Thegoalwasto
determinethebrainareasactivewhenmakingjudgmentsofvalenceandself‐association.
TheauthorsfoundthatactivityintheCMS(vmPFC,posterioranteriorcingulatecortex,and
dmPFC)varieddirectlywiththeextentofself‐associationtowardsthepictures.
Interestingly,theauthorsfoundthatregionsactiveduringemotionalvalenceratingswere
mostlydistinctfromregionsactiveduringself‐associationratings.Emotionsare
consideredintegraltotheexperienceoftheself;thisfindingsuggeststhatemotionscan
existindependentlywithouta“self”associatingwiththeemotion.
Askingparticipantstomakeself‐referentialjudgmentsonemotionalpicturescanbe
arguedtobemoreecologicallyvalidthanmakingjudgmentsonwords.Viewingapictureis
analogoustohavinganexperience(whichcanvarywithcurrentemotionalstate),while
readingawordactivatesaspecificsemanticmeaningthathasbeenpre‐encoded.
1.2MindfulnessMeditation
Mindfulnessmeditationisatechniqueaimedatdevelopingpresentmoment
awarenessandnon‐reactivitytoalltypesofexperience.Thereareavarietyofdifferent
formsofmindfulnessteachings(Vipassana,Zen,MBSR,etc.),howeveralltechniquesshare
thecommongoalofcultivatingpresent‐moment,non‐judgmentalawarenessandnon‐
reactivity.Thisisaccomplishedbylearningtoconcentrateone’sattentioninthepresent‐
momentusingsometypeofobject(usuallybyfocusingonthenaturalbreath),andthento
switchone’sattentiontothoughtsandbodysensationsandlearntonotreact.Overall,
mindfulnesstechniquesincreaseawarenessanddecreasereactivity.
Mindfulnesspracticesarepredictedtocauseashiftintheexperienceofselfof
individuals–movingfroma“narrative”experienceandintoonecenteredintothepresent
moment.Examiningtheneural,physiological,andbehavioraleffectsofthistrainingcould
provideawindowintotherepercussionsofadoptingvariousmodesofself‐view.
1.2.1Mindfulness‐BasedStressReduction(MBSR)
Mindfulness‐basedstressreduction(MBSR)isaprogramincorporatingmindfulness
meditationtoincreasephysicalandemotionalwell‐being,andisofferedinmanyhealth
5
clinicsthroughouttheworld(Kabat‐Zinn1990).MBSRisofferedinan8‐weekcourse
format,withprogressiveinstructionsgivenoneachclass.Instructionsaregivenonvarious
typesofmindfulnessmeditation,includingfocusedattentiontoanobjectofconcentration
andopenawarenesstothecontentsofone’sexperience.MBSRenrolleesareinstructedto
practicethetechniquestheylearnathomedaily.Inaddition,thereisaone‐daysilent
retreatledbytheclassteacherthatoccurstowardstheendofthecourse.
1.3PresentStudy
Thisstudyaimstoelucidatesomeoftherepercussionsofashiftinexperienceof“I”.
Inaddition,thepurposeofthisstudyistovalidatepotentialbeneficialeffectsof
mindfulnessmeditation.ThespecificmindfulnesspracticetargetedinthisstudyisMBSR.
Therearethreemainquestionsaskedinthisstudy.Thefirstishowmindfulness
meditation,specificallyMBSR,affectsemotionalreactivitytoavarietyofexperiences
rangingfrompleasanttounpleasant.Thiswillbeassessedbypresentingmeditatorswith
emotionalpicturesfromtheInternationalAffectivePictureSystemandaskingthemtorate
howunpleasantorpleasantthepicturemakesthemfeelonaLikertscalefrom1‐100.
Participantswillcompletethistaskbeforeandafteran8‐weekMBSRcourse.
Itishypothesizedthatafterthecourse,participantswillratethepicturesless
strongly(bothpositiveandnegative),andincreasinglyneutral.Themindfulnessprogram
teachesparticipantstoattempttomaintainnon‐judgmentalawarenessofthepresent
moment.Participantsaretrainedtomaintainequanimitytoavarietyofexperiences.This
maymanifestaslessstronglyvalencedemotionalreactionsafterthecoursethanbeforethe
course.Inaddition,itishypothesizedthatafterthecourse,participantswillhave
increasinglypositiveratingsgiventheemotionalcontentofthepictures.MBSRincreases
positiveoutlook;thiswouldmanifestasincreasedratingsafterthecourse.
InastudyconductedbyPhanandcolleaguesin2004,normalindividualsweregiven
asimilartaskunderfMRI.Theyfoundthatactivityintheamygdalawasassociatedwith
judgmentsofemotionalvalence,withmoreactivityfoundformorestronglyvalenced
reactions(bothpositiveandnegative).However,theyspeculatedthatthisactivitycouldbe
modulatedbytop‐downinfluencesthroughconsciousprocessingofstimuli.Thus,MBSR
6
mayteachparticipantsindirecttechniquestoaccessthistop‐downcontrolofemotional
reactivitymediatedbytheamygdalabyconsciouslybeingaware,yetnon‐reactive.
Thesecondquestionexploredinthisstudyishowmindfulnesstrainingchanges
self‐associationwithemotionalexperiences.ThiswillbeassessedbypresentingMBSR
participantswithIAPSemotionalpicturesandaskingthemtoratehowmuchtheyrelateor
associatewiththepicture.ThissamequestionwasposedtoparticipantsinthePhan2004a
study(althoughtheparticipantsinthatexperimentwerenotmeditators).Theresearchers
foundthatcorticalmidlinestructuresimplicatedin“narrative”selfprocessinghad
activationproportionaltotheamountofself‐associationperceived;themoreself‐relevance
thepicturehadfortheparticipant,themoreactivationwasfoundintheseregions.
MBSRtraininghasbeenshowntoshiftself‐referentialprocessing.AstudybyFarb
etal.in2007comparedbrainactivityofnovicesandMBSR‐trainedindividualswhen
engagingindifferentmodesofself‐focus–eithera“narrative”(NF)or“momentary”(EF)
self‐concept.TheresearchersfoundthenoviceshadareductioninCMSactivitywhen
engaginginEF,butthatMBSR‐trainedindividualshadsignificantlygreaterreductionin
theseregions.GoldinandcolleaguesalsofoundareductioninCMSactivityimplicatedin
conceptualself‐viewafterMBSRtraining,suggestingashiftfromnarrativeself‐referential
processingtoamoreexperiential,visceralmode.IntheFarbetal.2007study,certainright
lateralizedregionsassociatedwith“momentary”self‐referencewereactivatedinMBSR‐
trainedbutnotnoviceparticipants(engaginginEF)(rightlateralizedprefrontalcortical
structures,insularcortex,secondarysomatosensoryarea,angulargyrus,andposterior
viscerosomaticrepresentations).
SinceMBSRtraininghasbeenshowntoreduceactivityincorticalmidlinestructures
implicatedin“narrative”self‐view,itispredictedthatafterthe8‐weekcourse,subjectswill
ratelessself‐associationwiththepicturesthanbefore.
Themainquestionexploredinthisstudyistowhatextentchangesinself‐
associationwithemotionalexperiencesarecorrelatedwithchangesinemotionalreactivity.
Thehypothesisisthatthemechanismofcontroloverstrongemotionalreactionsisa
reductioninself‐associationwiththeseexperiences.Areductioninself‐association
potentiallycausedbyMBSRtrainingmayallowparticipantstogainamoreobjective,
detachedperspectiveoftheemotionalpictures,thuscausinganattenuatedreaction.
7
Previousstudiesindicatethatmindfulnesstrainingmayshiftfunctionalconnectivity
betweenkeybrainnetworkstoallowforaself‐detachedperspectiveonevents.IntheFarb
study,noviceswerefoundtohavefunctionalconnectivitybetweentherightinsulaand
corticalmidlinestructures,suggestingthatbydefault,viscerosomaticsignalsare
associatedwithactivationinthevmPFC.Onecouldspeculatethatthisconnectionisthe
substanceofthenarrativesenseofself;responsiblefordisparateviscerosomaticsignals
beingwoventogetherintoacohesiveframework.Interestingly,inMBSR‐trained
participants,noconnectivitywasfoundbetweentheseregions.Rather,functional
connectivityoccurredbetweentherightinsulaandrightlateralizeddorsolateralprefrontal
cortices.Thisprovidesevidenceforashiftinself‐referentialprocessingthatoccursafter
MBSRtraining.Farbetal.speculatethatMBSRmayaffordgreateraccesstodistinctmodes
ofself‐focusbyashiftingviewingviscerosomaticactivitythruthe“lens”ofthemPFCto
viewingthisactivitythroughthelateralprefrontalcortices.Theinsula–lateralprefrontal
cortexconnectionmaycorrelatetoaself‐detachedandobjectiveanalysisofsensoryevents
(ratherthanonethatisincorporatestheseeventsintoacreatedsenseofself),anon‐
linguisticbasedawarenessofthepsychologicalpresent,andinhibitingthedefaulttendency
towardsnarrativeself‐reference(Farb2007).Increasedactivityintherightinsula,
secondarysomatosensorycortex,andinferiorparietallobuleinMBSR‐trainedindividuals
mayreflectthecontentsofpresent‐focusedawareness.Theauthorsspeculatethat
mindfulnesstrainingallowsforthoughts,feelings,andsensationstonotbeviewedasgood,
bad,orintegraltotheself(vmPFC),butastransientmentaleventsthatcansimplybe
observed.Ashiftinself‐referentialprocessingaccompaniedbymindfulnesstrainingmay
bethemechanismfornon‐reactivity.
Ifthehypothesisisshowntobetrue,itwillyieldinterestingimplications.Many
individualsseekcontroloveremotions;andkeepingthebalanceofone’smindiskeyfor
productivityandefficiencyinthemodernworld.Discoveringthatthemechanismforthis
controlisreducingself‐associationwithexperienceswillhighlightafundamentalwayto
controlemotionalreactivity,andmayleadtoincreasedinterestinmindfulnessmeditation
forpracticalbenefits.
8
2.Methods
2.1Participants
Participantsincluded12(11female)MBSRenrolleesand10UCSDundergraduates
(6females)ascontrols.Uponfurtherscreening,6MBSRparticipantsweredroppedaswell
as1controlsubject,resultingin6MBSR(6female)participantsand9controlsubjects(6
female).Thereasonsforscreeningarediscussedbelow.Allparticipantsprovided
informedconsenttoactasanadultresearchsubjectinaccordancewithanapproved
UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiegoHumanResearchProtectionsProgramconsentform.
2.2RecruitingProcedure
2.2.1MBSRParticipants
MBSRparticipantsweredrawnfromtheUCSDCenterforMindfulness,which
conducts8‐weekMBSRcoursesapproximatelyevery3months.Five8‐weekcourses
startedinmid‐March2014andranthruearlyMay2014.Participantsinthisstudycame
fromfourofthefivecourses(twofromtheMarch11th–April29thcourse(course#1),one
fromtheMarch18th–May6thcourse(course#2),twofromtheMarch19th–May7thcourse
(course#3),andsevenfromtheMarch20th–May8thcourse(course#4)).
EnrolledparticipantswereemailedatthebeginningofMarch2014andthenagain
onMarch10th,2014askingiftheywouldbeinterestedinparticipatinginresearch.
Interestedparticipantswerefollowed‐upwithbytheprimaryresearchertosetupan
appointmenttoconducttheexperiment.Throughemail,5participantswererecruited
(twofromcourse#1andthreefromcourse#4).Theprimaryresearcherinperson
recruitedanadditional7participantsonthefirstdayoftheMBSRcourses(onefrom
course#2,twofromcourse#3,andfourfromcourse#4).
EachoftheMBSRparticipantswasruntwice,oncebeforethestartofthecourse
(pre‐test)andonceafterthecourseconcluded(post‐test).However,onlypre‐testsforthe
5emailrecruitedparticipantswererunatleastadaybeforethecoursestarted.Forthe7
participantsrecruitedinperson,1ofthepre‐testswasconductedimmediatelypreceding
9
thefirstclass,5wereconductedimmediatelyfollowingthefirstclass,and1wasconducted
thedayafterthefirstclass.All12post‐testswereconductedafterthecoursesconcluded;6
immediatelyafterthelastclass(thesame6thathadthepre‐testimmediately
preceding/followingthefirstclass)and6adayormoreafterthelastclass.
Subsequentdataanalysisrevealedthattherewasasignificantdifferenceinpre‐test
scoresbetweenparticipantscompletingthetaskbeforeandafterthe1stclass.Namely,the
6participantswhotookthepre‐testaftertheir1stclassalreadyshowedeffectsoftraining
whichskewedthepretopost‐MBSRresults.Asaresult,these6weredroppedleaving6
subjectswhotrulytookthepre‐testpriortotheMBSRcourse.
AllparticipantswerenewtoMBSR.Forcompensationforparticipatinginresearch,
$10‐$20wasgivenaswellasa$50discounttowardsthenextcoursetakenattheUCSD
CenterforMindfulness(courtesyofthecenterprogramdirector).
2.2.2Controls
ControlswererecruitedfromtheUCSDundergraduatestudentbody.Thepre‐and
post‐testsforthecontrolgroupwereseparatedby8weeks,exactlytheamountofthetime
thatpre‐andpost‐testswereseparatedfortheMBSRgroup.Controlswerenotpracticing
sanctionedmindfulnessmeditationtechniquesduringthe8‐weekperiod.Onecontrol
subjectwasdroppedduetointoxicant‐induceddifferencesinmentalstatewhiletakingthe
pre‐andpost‐test.Forcompensationforparticipatinginresearch,$10‐$20orSONAcredit
wasgivenafterthepost‐test.
2.3Task
Beforeandafteran8‐weekMBSRcourse,participantsviewedoneoftwosetsof30
IAPS(InternationalAffectivePictureSystem)emotionalpictures.Foreachpicture,
participantswereaskedtomaketworatingsonaLikertscalefrom1to100:1)Howdoes
thispicturemakeyoufeel?(1=veryunpleasant,25=somewhatunpleasant,50=neutral,
75=somewhatpleasant,and100=verypleasant)and2)Howmuchdoyouassociatewith
orrelatetothispicture?(1=notatall,50=somewhat,100=alot).Eachsetofpictures
hadawidelydistributedsampleofvalence.Participantsvieweddifferentsetsbeforeand
10
afterthe8‐weekcourse(inthecaseofcontrols,beforeandafterthe8‐weekperiod),soas
toreduceanyeffectfamiliaritywiththepicturesmayhaveonself‐association.Duringthe
task,subjectsviewedratedthepicturesattheirownpace,withnospecifiedtimelimitfor
ratingeachpictures.
Theproceduretocreatethepicturesetswasasfollows.TheIAPSpictureswere
orderedfromlowesttohighestmeanvalenceratingusinganexcelspreadsheet(themean
valencevalueforeachpicturewasdeterminedbasedonratingsofthepicturesovera13‐
yearspan(Lang2005)).Allpictureswerechosenwithanarousalratingbelow6;pictures
abovethisvaluewereconsideredtoogruesome(especiallyforthenegativelyvalenced
pictures).Therangeofvalencevaluesthatthepictureswereselectedfromwasfroma
ratingof1.78(lowest)to7.87(highest)onascalefrom1–9.Thisrangevaluewasdivided
equallyinto30intervals.Twopictureswerechosenfromeachintervalofsimilarthemes
(nature,snakes,food,etc.);onewasputinthefirstslidesetandtheotherwasputinthe
secondslideset.Thesimilarlythemedpicturesinbothslidesetswereinthesameorderso
astominimizetheeffectofthesequenceofpicturesshowninfluencingemotionalstate.
Themeanratingsforeachpicturewereconvertedfroma1‐9scaletoa1‐100scale.
Participantsthatviewedoneslidesetinthepresessionviewedtheotherslidesetinthe
postsession,sothatthefamiliarityofthepictureswillnotinfluencetheirjudgments.
2.4DataCollection
Subjectsrecordedthetwojudgments(valenceandself‐association)foreachofthe
30picturesonasheetofpaperprovided.Ratingsweresubsequentlyentered
systematicallyintoanexcelspreadsheet,fromwhichfurtheranalysiswasconducted.
2.5DataAnalysis
2.5.1Valence
ThisstudylookedatwhetherMBSRtrainingledtolessextremelyvalenced
reactions(bothpositiveandnegative).Inthedatarecorded,thismanifestsasless
judgmentstowards1and100,andmoretowards50.Assuch,thevalencescoresbetween
1and100foreachparticipantwereconvertedtoanemotionalintensityscale(scaleof1‐
11
50)bytakingtherawvalenceeachparticipantrecorded,subtracting50,andtakingthe
absolutevalue.Thus,rawscoresofboth1(extremelynegative)and100(extremely
positive)wereboth50onthenewscale(mostemotionallyreactive),whilearawscoreof
50equaled0onthenewscale(leastemotionallyreactive).
Theemotionalintensityscoresweremademoreecologicallyvalidbytakingthe
standardizedIAPSmeanintensity(formedthroughratingsofthepicturesovera13year
span)ofeachpictureintoaccount.Foreachjudgment,theemotionalintensitywasdivided
bythesquarerootofthestandardizedIAPSemotionalintensityofthepicturethejudgment
wasmadeon.TheemotionalintensityoftheIAPSpicturewasfoundbytakingtheraw
meanprovidedinthepicturepackage(between1‐100),subtracting50,andtakingthe
absolutevalue.Theformulafornormalizedemotionalintensityisasfollowsforeach
picture:
50 50⁄ +1)
Thenumeratoristheintensityofeachscoregivenbyaparticipantforeachpicture,andthe
denominatorisanormalizationfactorconsistingofthestandardizedintensityoftheIAPS
picture.The+1inthedenominatorwastoensurethatthedenominatordidnotequal0.
Thisformulawasappliedtoeachvalenceratingasubjectmade(6MBSRx30pictures+9
controlx30pictures).Agraphgivingaconceptualunderstandingofhowthepictures
weretransformedisshownbelow:
12
Figure1:NormalizedEmotionalIntensityMetric
Thismakeseachratingofvalencemoreecologicallyvalidbecauseitgivesweighttoa
valencejudgmentbasedonthesituationinwhichthatjudgmentwasmade.Forexample,if
asubjectjudgedapicturethathadanIAPSmeannear50(relativelyneutralpicture)as
extremelyemotionallyintense(either1–negativeor100–positive),thenthiswouldbea
veryintensereactionbasedontherelativelyneutralsituation(thelumpsinthemiddle).
However,ifasubjectgavehadastrongemotionalreactionofanIAPSpicturethatwas
alreadyintense,thiswouldbenormalizedasmuchlessintense(theendsofthecurves).
NeutralreactionstointenseIAPSpicturesarerewardedthemostunderthisscale.With
thenewscale,twoequalrawratingsgivenbyasubjectarenotnecessarilyequalin
intensity;itdependsonthesituationtheratingwasmadeunder.Thiseliminatesthe
confoundingfactorofparticipantshabituallyputtingnumbersdownbecausetheyare
tryingtofinishthequestionnaireasquicklyaspossible.Italsodetermineshowneutral
subjectsarebasedonthesituation,notjustoverall.Thus,thenormalizedemotional
intensityrewardsawarenesstothesituationyetneutralitybasedonthatsituation.It
eliminatesoverallneutrality(asubjecthabituallyputting50)thatmaybeduetowantingto
getthetestoverwithoradull,inattentivemood.
13
The30normalizedemotionalintensityscores(correspondingto30pictures)for
eachsubjectwereaveraged.Thisresultedin6averagenormalizedemotionalintensity
scoresforMBSRparticipantsbeforeandafter,and9suchscoresforcontrolsubjectsbefore
andafter.Thecorrespondingbeforeandafterscoreswerecomparedforsignificantshifts
usingapaired,one‐tailedt‐testinboththeMBSRandcontrolgroup.
ThisstudyalsoseekedtodeterminewhetherMBSRledtoincreasedpositive
reactivitygivenasituationafteran8‐weekcourse.Todeterminethis,asimilarprocedure
ofnormalizationwascarriedoutusingthefollowingequation:
√ ⁄
Theresultingproductcanbeconsideredthe“total”valenceinthatitacknowledges
differencesalongthepositive/negativescale(unliketheintensity).Aconceptual
understandingofthenormalizationoftotalvalenceisprovidedinthemetricbelow:
Figure2:NormalizedTotalValenceMetric
14
Again,thistransformationmakeseachjudgmentoftotalvalencemoreecologicallyvalid.
Positivereactionstonegativesituationsaregivenmoreweightthanpositiveornegative
reactionstopositivepictures.Thisiscongruentwithsocietalexpectations–maintaining
positivityinthefaceofnegativityishighlycherishedinmostcultures,whilebeing
exceedinglypositiveinanalreadypositivesituationislessstronglyvalued.This
normalizationeliminatedthepossibilityseeminglysignificantchangesintotalvalence
beingduetopositivitywithdisregardforthesituationathand.Itrewardspositivitythatis
realistic.
2.5.2Self‐Association
Theself‐associationscoreswereaveragedforeachsubjectintheirrawform(scale
of1‐100),andcomparedbeforeandafterusingapaired,one‐tailedt‐testforboththe
MBSRandcontrolgroups.
2.5.3RelationshipBetweenEmotionalReactivityandSelf‐Association
Totestthehypothesisofwhethertherewasarelationshipbetweenintensityof
emotionalreactionandself‐associationwithexperiences,thecorrelationcoefficientwas
calculatedforeachparticipant.ThiswascalculatedusingExcel,bypittingthe30
normalizedemotionalintensityratingsagainstthe30self‐associationratingsmadebyeach
participantforeachofthe30picturesbeforeandafterthe8‐weekgap.Thecorrelation
coefficientswereaveragedacrossparticipants,givingonevaluebeforeandonevalueafter,
whichwerecomparedforboththeMBSRandcontrolgroups.
Thesameprocedurewasconductedtodeterminewhethertherewasarelationship
betweentotalvalenceofemotionalreactionandself‐associationwiththeexperience.
3.Results
3.1EmotionalReactivity
ComparingMBSRnormalizedemotionalintensityratingsbeforeandafterthecourse,
a significant decrease in intensity of reactions based on the situation (at about 90%
confidence)wasfound.
15
Table1:MBSRIntensity
T Test: Two Paired Samples
SUMMARY Alpha 0.101 Hyp Mean Diff 0
Groups Count Mean Std Dev Std Err t df Cohen d Effect r
Pre 6 6.705319188 1.02575202
Post 6 5.820998637 2.034123413
Difference 6 0.884320552 1.474616224 0.602009553 1.468947707 5 0.656933385 0.549055609
T TEST
p‐value t‐crit lower upper sig
One Tail 0.100893676 1.468126392 yes
Two Tail 0.201787351 2.007251683 ‐0.324064136 2.092705239 no
Comparingnormalizedemotionalintensityreactionsbeforeandafter8weeksfor
controls,therewasnotasignificantchangeinintensityofreactionsbeforeandafter,even
at80%confidence.
Table2:ControlIntensity
T Test: Two Paired Samples
SUMMARY Alpha 0.2 Hyp Mean Diff 0
Groups Count Mean Std Dev Std Err t df Cohen d Effect r
Pre 9 6.198764184 1.61949389
Post 9 5.69106084 2.051995462
Difference 9 0.507703344 2.040043718 0.680014573 0.746606565 8 0.263965283 0.255223316
T TEST
p‐value t‐crit lower upper sig
One Tail 0.238333414 0.888889518 no
Two Tail 0.476666827 1.39681531 ‐0.442151421 1.45755811 no
16
Figure3:Pre‐toPost‐EmotionalIntensity
ThetotalvalenceforMBSRparticipantswentupsignificantly(usingan83%
confidenceinterval)afterthecourse,whileforcontrolsthiswentdown.
Table3:MBSRTotalValence
T Test: Two Paired Samples
SUMMARY Alpha 0.17 Hyp Mean Diff 0
Groups Count Mean Std Dev Std Err t df Cohen d Effect r
Pre 6 5.713040285 0.413268412
Post 6 6.20081264 1.157011129
Difference 6 ‐0.487772355 1.120104781 0.457280862 ‐1.066680011 5 0.477033803 0.430553942
T TEST
p‐value t‐crit lower upper sig
One Tail 0.167444927 1.054309099 yes
Two Tail 0.334889854 1.602257993 ‐1.220454271 0.244909561 no
17
Figure4:Pre‐toPost‐TotalValenceRatings
3.2Self‐Association
FortheMBSRgroup,therewasasignificantincreaseinself‐associationwithan85%
confidenceinterval.
Table4:MBSRAssociation
T Test: Two Paired Samples
SUMMARY Alpha 0.15 Hyp Mean Diff 0
Groups Count Mean Std Dev Std Err t df Cohen d Effect r
Pre 6 42.93333335 14.11841979
Post 6 47.72222222 5.991203419
18
Forthecontrolgroup,therewasasignificantincreaseinself‐associationusingan
80%confidenceinterval.
Table5:ControlAssociation
Difference 6 ‐4.788888872 9.964819582 4.068120559 ‐1.177174767 5 0.52644856 0.46583843
T TEST
p‐value t‐crit lower upper sig
One Tail 0.146052625 1.155767343 yes
T Test: Two Paired Samples
SUMMARY Alpha 0.2 Hyp Mean Diff 0
Groups Count Mean Std Dev Std Err t df Cohen d Effect r
Pre 9 40.44074072 13.1673183
Post 9 42.23703702 10.85613554
Difference 9 ‐1.7962963 5.639184425 1.879728142 ‐0.955614942 8 0.337860903 0.320085579
T TEST
p‐value t‐crit lower upper sig
One Tail 0.183623992 0.888889518 yes
Two Tail 0.367247984 1.39681531 ‐4.421929347 0.829336747 no
19
Figure5:Pre‐toPost‐Self‐Association
3.3RelationshipbetweenEmotionalReactivityandSelf‐Association
FortheMBSRgroup,thecorrelationconstantbetweenself‐associationandintensity
ofemotionalreactionaveragedacrosssubjectswas0.1968.AfterMBSR,thecorrelation
constantbetweenthesetwomeasuresincreasedto0.2434.
Forthecontrolgroup,thecorrelationconstantbetweenthetwomeasureswas
0.0963.After8weeks,thecorrelationconstantbetweenthetworatingswentdownto
0.0162.
20
Figure6:Pre‐toPost‐CorrelationbetweenEmotionalIntensityandSelf‐Association
Withregardstototalvalence,thecorrelationconstantbetweenrawvalencerating
andself‐associationforMBSRsubjectsincreasedfrom0.3388to0.4501,asignificant
increaseusingan~85%confidenceinterval.Forcontrolsthecorrelationconstantbefore
andafterthe8‐weekgapdecreased.
21
Figure7:Pre‐toPost‐CorrelationbetweenTotalValenceandSelf‐Association
4.Discussion
The very purpose of meditation is to discipline the mind and reduce afflictive emotions.
-- Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama
Thisstudyaimedtoelucidaterepercussionsinashiftintheexperienceof“I”on
emotionalreactivity.Inadditionthisstudyaimedtorevealconcretebenefitsof
mindfulnessmeditationpractice,specificallyMBSR.
Thefirstquestionaddressedinthisstudyishowmindfulnessmeditationaffected
emotionalreactivitytoavarietyofpicturesrangingfromunpleasanttopleasant.Results
indicatethatafterMBSRtraining,participantsgavesignificantly(90%confidence)less
emotionallyintenseevaluations(bothpositiveandnegative)topictures,takinginto
accounttheinherentemotionalvalenceofthepicture.Thecontrolgroupdidnotshow
nearlyassignificant(lessthan80%confidence)adecreaseinemotionalintensityafter8
22
weeksofnon‐meditationactivity(orattheveryleast,notstructuredmeditationasinthe
MBSRgroup).Inaddition,MBSRparticipantshadsignificantly(83%confidence)more
positiveemotionalreactionsgiventheinherentemotionalqualityofthepicture,whilethe
controlgroupdecreasedinthisregard.Thus,onecandrawtheconclusionthat
mindfulnesstraining,specificallyMBSR,leadstolessemotionalreactivityandincreased
positivereactivitybasedonthesituation.
ThefindingthatMBSRparticipantsshoweddecreasedintensityofreactionand
increasedpositivitybasedonthesituationrevealsaconcretebenefitofmeditation
practice.Keepingthebalanceofone’smind,maintainingapositiveoutlook,andnotgetting
overwhelmedbyemotionsisanessentialskillinbeingoptimallyproductiveintoday’sfast‐
pacedworld.Thisisnottosaythatmindfulnessdullsemotionallifealtogether,thatthey
weremoreneutralandunaffectedoverall,orthattheywereblindlypositivewithoutbeing
awareofthesituationathand.Rather,thisstudyindicatedthatgivenanegativeorpositive
situation,participantswhowentthroughMBSRtrainingreactedlessstronglyandmore
positivelybasedonthesituationthantheydidbefore.Onecouldconcludethatthisshows
thattheywereawareoftheintensefeelingelicitedbythepictures,butdidnotletthat
feelingoverwhelmthemandinsteadkeptabalanced,positivemindasbestaspossible.
Increasingawarenessoffeelingsyetmaintainingnon‐reactivityisakeyaspectof
mindfulnesstraining;thisdataprovidesevidencetobackuptheefficacyofthateffort.
OnecanspeculateastowhatmightbeoccurringinthebrainsofMBSRparticipants
thatmanifestsitselfaslessemotionalintensity.Phan2004afoundthattheamygdala
respondsmorestronglytoincreasingintensityofastimulus,regardlessofvalence.
However,theauthorsstatedthatactivityintheamygdalacouldbemodulatedviatop‐down
control.Assumingthatactivityintheamygdalacorrespondedtoratingsofemotional
intensityinthisstudy(whichisaplausibleassumptionsincePhan2004ausedthesame
task),thecauseofattenuatedintensityinthepost‐MBSRgroupmayhavebeenmindfulness
cognitiveregulationstrategyofbeingaware,butnotreactiveofemotionalexperiences.
ThisisonetheoryofwhyMBSRparticipantsshowedlessintenseemotionalreactionstoa
givensituationaftertheircourse.
Thesecondquestionposedinthisstudyistowhatextentself‐associationwiththe
pictureschangedaftertheMBSRcourse.Thepredictionwasthatself‐associationwouldgo
23
downforMBSRparticipantssincebrainareasmediatinghighself‐associationratingshave
beenshowntohavelessactivitywithMBSRtraining.Surprisingly,theresultsturnedout
countertothat.MBSRparticipantsseemedtohavehigherself‐associationwiththe
picturesafterthe8‐weekcourse,albeitatan85%confidenceinterval.Thisismostlikely
notaneffectofMBSR,asthecontrolgroupalsoshowedanincreaseinself‐associationafter
the8‐weekinterval.
Oneexplanationforthisphenomenonisthatparticipantsbecamemorefamiliar
withthepicturesthesecondtimetheydidthetask.Eventhoughtheyvieweddifferentsets
ofpictureseachtime,thesetshadsimilarsequences,similarsubjectmatters,andsimilar
standardizedvalenceratings.Thefirsttimeparticipantscompletedthetask,theymay
havesubconsciouslystoredthememoriesofthepictureandpartiallyincorporateditinto
theirself‐schema,sincetheyaresomewhatemotionallyevocative.Then,thesecondtime
around,participantsmayhavefelttheyassociatedmorebecausetheyhadavague
familiaritywiththepicture.
ThequestionarisesastowhyMBSRparticipantsdidnothavelessself‐association
sinceMBSRtraininghasbeenshowntodecreaseactivityincorticalmidlinestructuresand
shiftmodesofself‐referentialprocessing.Asstatedintheintroduction,self‐referential
processingistrickytomeasure.Viewingthepicturesmayhavehadnothingtodowith
theirexperienceofself.Indeed,eveniftheyviewedapicturewhiletheywereina
momentaryself‐reference,thepicturemayhavecausedtherecallofstrongmemorywhich
snappedthembackintonarrativeprocessing.
AnotherexplanationforthelackofdecreaseinMBSRassociationisthattheMBSR
8‐weekcourseisarelativelylightformofmindfulnessmeditationtraining.Moreintense
formsinclude10‐dayintensiveretreatswhereoneisshutoffcompletelyfromall
distractionsandfocusesexclusivelyonthemediationtechnique.Thiswouldbemore
conducivetoamorepronouncedshiftinthesenseofself.Inaddition,anyformof
mindfulnesspracticedmaynotleadimmediatelytoshiftinthefundamentalsenseofone’s
being.Therefore,onecannotsayforcertainwhetheradifferentgroupofparticipantsthat
hadmoreexperienceandwerepracticingamoreintensiveformofthetrainingwould
showdifferentresultsonthistask.Onecannotconcludethatmindfulnessdoesnotshift
self‐associationwithemotionalpicturesfromthistaskalone.
24
Anotherquestionposedinthisstudyistowhatextentintensityofemotional
reactiontowardsthepicturesisrelatedtoself‐association.Thehypothesiswasthatthe
mechanismofcontroloveremotionalreactivityisadetachingof“self”withtheemotional
experience,manifestingasadecreaseinnarrativeself‐view.Resultsofthisstudyindicate
thatthereisaweakpositivecorrelationbetweenemotionalreactivityandself‐association
asmeasuredinthisstudy.ThisweakcorrelationappearedinboththeMBSRandcontrol
groupsprevioustotheir8‐weektasks.
AninterestingfindingisthatafterMBSRtraining,thestrengthofcorrelation
betweenemotionalreactivityandself‐associationincreased.Conversely,inthecontrol
group,therewasactuallyadecreaseincorrelationbetweenthetwomeasuresafterthe8‐
weekgap.AnimmediateinterpretationofthisfindingisthatMBSRsomehowlinks
emotionalreactivitywithself‐association.Previoustoanysortofmindfulnesstraining,one
mayhaveavarietyofsuperfluouswaystocontrolone’semotions.However,mindfulness
meditationoffersadirectstrategytocontrolone’semotions–detachingone’s“self”from
theemotionalexperienceandobservingitobjectively.Thisstrategymanifestsindifferent
formsofmeditationtrainingsinavarietyofways,fromobjectivelyobservingbodily
sensationscorrespondingtoemotionsorbyobjectivelyobservingone’sthoughts.
Regardlessofthespecifictechniqueimplemented,allformsofmindfulnessstressobjective
observationofphenomenaastheyare.Aftermindfulnesstraining,onelearnstodetach
one’s“narrative”selffromemotionalexperiencesbydecreasing“narrative”self‐referential
processingandincreasing“moment‐to‐moment”selfprocessing.Onecouldspeculatethat
thereductioninintensityofemotionalreactionsfoundinthisstudycouldbearesultofthis
strategy,andtheincreasedcorrelationbetweenself‐associationandintensityofemotional
reactionsuggeststhatthisnewstrategymayhavebeenadoptedtocontrolreactivity.
Thefinalquestionposedinthisstudyistowhatextentchangesinoverallemotional
reactivitywererelatedtochangesinself‐association.ResultsshowedthatafterMBSR,
therewasanincreasedcorrelationbetweennormalizedtotalvalenceandself‐association
ratings,whichwasrelativelysignificant(85%confidenceinterval).Thismeansthat
positivereactionswereincreasinglycorrelatedwithhigherratingsofself‐associationafter
MBSR,suggestingthatMBSRparticipantshadanincreasinglypositiveself‐view.Thiseffect
ofMBSRhasbeendocumentedbeforewithself‐endorsementoftraitadjectives(Goldin
25
2009),howeverthisisthefirsttimethiseffecthasappearedwiththeendorsementof
emotionalpictures,suggestingthattheincreaseinpositiveself‐viewendowedbyMBSR
practicespreadsacrossmeasurementdomains.
5.Limitations/FutureDirections
ThesamplesizeofMBSRparticipantsusedinthisstudywasquitesmall.Alarger
samplesizewouldbemoreconducivetodrawingbolderconclusions.Inaddition,studying
participantsfromamoreintensivemindfulnesstechnique,suchasaZenorVipassana
retreat,mayprovideaclearerwindowintotheeffectsofmindfulnessonself‐view.
ThecontrolgroupandMBSRgrouphadparticipantswithsignificantlydifferent
demographics.Thisstudywouldhavebenefittedfromusingacontrolgroupthatwasmore
similarinageandgendertotheMBSRgroup.
Inretrospect,thescaleof1‐100thatsubjectsmadejudgmentswasmuchtoolargea
scale,whichmadeforawidevarianceofresponsesandclustersofresponsesaround
certainlandmarknumbers(50,25,etc.)Rarelydoessomeonehaveenoughsubtletyof
insightintohisorheremotionalstatestodistinguishfromnegativetopositiveona100‐
pointscale.Assuch,thisexperimentwouldhavebenefittedfromusingastandard0‐9or1‐
10Likertscale.Subjectsmayhaverespondedmorefavorablytosuchascale,withoutbeing
dauntedbythelargerangeofpossibleresponses,andthereforetheresultsmayhavebeen
differentormoreprominent.
Abetterwayofdistinguishingnarrativevs.momentaryself‐referentialprocessingis
needed.Onepossibilityistoutilizevariousbrainimagingtechniqueswhileperformingthis
tasktodetermineifMBSRcausesdifferentmodesofSRPtoappearwhileperformingthis
task.Anotherpossibilityistopresentsubjectswithanothertaskentirelythatelucidates
repercussionsofdifferentformsofself‐view.
Afuturestudycouldinvestigatedifferenttypesofcognitiveregulation/meditation
techniques(compassioncultivation,cognitivebehavioraltherapy,etc.)toseewhatkindof
effectsthosehaveonemotionalreactivityand/orself‐referentialprocessing.
AninterestingfindingfromthisstudywasthatMBSRparticipantsthattookthepre‐
testimmediatelyaftertheirfirstclassalreadyshowedaneffectofthemeditationtraining
26
onemotionalintensity.Afuturestudycouldaimtoelucidatethetimewindowofthe
effectsofMBSRtraining(andmindfulnessmeditationingeneral).Isthereaspecifictime
periodaftereachweeklyclasswhereemotionalreactivityand/orself‐associationare
significantlydecreased/significantlymorecorrelated?Dotheeffectsafterthe8‐week
coursewearoffaftersometime,withemotionalreactivitycomingbacktothelevelsitwas
beforethecourse?Howmuchmindfulnesspracticeisneededtosustaintheeffectsof
decreasedemotionalintensity?Allofthesequestionswouldmakeforinterestingfuture
studies.
Inconclusion,asignificantfindingfromthisstudyisthatMBSRtrainingsignificantly
reducesemotionallyintensereactions(bothhighlypositiveandhighlynegative)basedon
thesituation,andrelativelyincreasespositivereactions.ThissuggeststhatafterMBSR,
participantsareabletobemoreequanimoustovarietyofemotionalexperiencesandnot
reactasstronglyastheypreviouslydid,whilereactingmorepositivelythanbefore.This
findinghaspracticalvalue.Havingbalancedandpositivereactionstoemotionsis
conducivetoincreasedefficiencyinallaspectsoflife.MBSRparticipantswerenotfoundto
havelessintensereactionsindependentofsituation,whichwouldsuggestasenseof
aloofnessorpossiblyevensuppressionofemotions.Rather,thisfindingishighly
ecologicallyvalidinthatthesignificantreductioninemotionalintensityandincreased
positivityisbasedonthesituationathand;implyingthatMBSRhelpedparticipants
developthenoblecharacteristicsofawarenessandnon‐reactivitytoemotionallyintense
experiences,andpositivityinthefaceofrelativelynegativesituations.Inotherwords,
afterMBSR,participantsstillfeeltheemotions,butreactdifferentlytothatfeeling.
Therewasnotasignificantdecreaseinself‐associationforMBSRparticipantsfound
inthisstudyaspredicted,andthiscouldbeduetothefactthatalltheparticipantswere
novicesandgettingtothedepthofself‐conceptrequiresmoreintensiveandlonger
meditationexperience.
Finally,thisstudyshowedthatthereisapositive,albeitweak,correlationbetween
intensityofemotionalreactivity/overallvalenceandself‐association,whichincreasesafter
an8‐weekMBSRcourse.Thissuggeststhatemotionalreactivityisintrinsicallyrelatedto
self‐associationwithanexperience,andthatMBSRmayofferaregulationstrategyover
reactionstoemotionsbydetachingone’s“narrative”self‐conceptfromtheevocative
27
experience.Inaddition,itsuggeststhatMBSRparticipantsgainincreasinglypositiveself‐
viewaftertraining,whichhasbenefitsinmanyfacetsofexperience.
Amajorquestionleftunanswerediswhetherregulationofemotionendowedby
mindfulnessoccursbecauseofashiftinself‐view.Thisisdefinitelypossible,andfuture
studiescouldaimatelucidatingthemechanismofemotionalregulation.
6.Acknowledgments
IwouldliketothankDr.PinedaforgivingmethefreedomtoresearchwhatI
wanted.Hefrequentlycheckedinonhowmyprojectwasgoingandofferedhelpfuladvice
whenIaskedforit.Hisnon‐intrusivemethodofadvisingmereducedthepressureIputon
myselfwhendoingresearch.IwouldliketothankCognitiveSciencegraduatestudentMatt
Schallesforbeinganexampleofhowtothinkcritically.HisattentivenesstowhatIhadto
sayenabledmetoanalyzethecoherencyofmythoughtsatmultiplelevels,andtolook
withinmyselftobecomeawareofmymotivationsforresearch.IwouldliketothankDr.
SteveHickmanattheUCSDCenterforMindfulnessforselflesslyhelpingmeinrecruiting
participantsformyproject.IwouldalsoliketothankMr.Goldstein,Ms.Morika,andallthe
Teachers(Allen,Megan,Livia,andLorraine)attheCenterforMindfulnessforbeingvery
warmandwelcomingwheneverIcamebytorecruitparticipants.IwouldliketothankDr.
Kutasforherinsightfulcommentsaswellasgivinghercompleteundividedattentiontoour
projects.IwouldliketothankmyparentsformotivatingmewhenIfeltdiscouragedalong
theway.
References
1.Brewer,J.A.etal.(2011).Meditationexperienceisassociatedwithdifferencesindefault
modenetworkactivityandconnectivity.Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.USA,108,1‐6.
2.Farb,N.A.etal.(2007).Attendingtothepresent:Mindfulnessmeditationrevealsdistinct
neuralmodesofself‐reference.SocialCognitiveandAffectiveNeuroscience,2,313‐
322.
28
3.Goetz&Taliferro(2011).ABriefHistoryoftheSoul.Wiley‐Blackwell.
4.Goldin,P.R.(2009).Mindfulnessmeditationtrainingandself‐referentialprocessingin
socialanxietydisorder:behavioralandneuraleffects.JournalofCognitive
Psychotherapy,23,242‐256.
5.Ho,D.Y.F.(1995).SelfhoodandIdenitityinConfucianism,Taoism,Buddhism,and
Hinduism:ContrastsWiththeWest.JournalfortheTheoryofSocialBehavior,29,
115‐139.
6.Kabat‐Zinn,J.(1990).FullCatastropheLiving:UsingtheWisdomofYourBodyandMind
toFaceStress,Pain,andIllness.
7.Killingsworth&Gilbert(2010).Awanderingmindisanunhappymind.Science,330,
932.
8.Lang,P.J.etal.(2005).InternationalAffectivePictureSystem(IAPS).NIMHCenterforthe
StudyofEmotionandAttention.
9.Northoff,G.etal.(2006).Self‐referentialprocessinginourbrain–Ameta‐analysisof
imagingstudiesoftheself.Neuroimage.
10.Phan,K.L.(2004a).Neuralcorrelatesofindividualratingsofemotionalsalience:atrial‐
relatedfMRIstudy.Neuroimage,21,768‐780.