Effects of the Best Possible Self intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Autoři:
Alba Carrillo aff001; María Rubio-Aparicio aff002; Guadalupe Molinari aff003; Ángel Enrique aff005; Julio Sánchez-Meca aff006; Rosa M. Baños aff001
Působiště autorů:
Department of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatments, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
aff001; Department of Health Psychology, University of Alicante, Alicante, Spain
aff002; Department of Basic, Clinical and Biological Psychology, University Jaume I, Castellón, Spain
aff003; CIBER Fisiopatología Obesidad y Nutrición (CIBEROBN), Instituto Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
aff004; School of Psychology, University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
aff005; Department of Basic Psychology and Methodology, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain
aff006
Vyšlo v časopise:
PLoS ONE 14(9)
Kategorie:
Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222386
Souhrn
The Best Possible Self (BPS) exercise promotes a positive view of oneself in the best possible future, after working hard towards it. Since the first work that attempted to examine the benefits of this intervention in 2001, studies on the BPS have grown exponentially and, currently, this is one of the most widely used Positive Psychology Interventions. However, little is yet known about its overall effectiveness in increasing wellbeing outcomes. Thus, the aim of this meta-analysis is to shed light on this question. A systematic literature search was conducted, and 29 studies (in 26 articles) met the inclusion criteria of empirically testing the intervention and comparing it to a control condition. In addition, BPS was compared to gratitude interventions in some of the included studies. A total of 2,909 participants were involved in the analyses. The outcome measures were wellbeing, optimism, depressive symptoms, and positive and negative affect. Results showed that the BPS is an effective intervention to improve wellbeing (d+ = .325), optimism (d+ = .334) and positive affect (d+ = .511) comparing to controls. Small effect sizes were obtained for negative affect and depressive symptoms. Moderator analyses did not show statistically significant results for wellbeing, except for a trend towards significance in the age of the participants (years) and the magnitude of the intervention (total minutes of practice). In addition, the BPS was found to be more beneficial for positive and negative affect than gratitude interventions (d+ = .326 and d+ = .485, respectively). These results indicate that the BPS can be considered a valuable Positive Psychology Intervention to improve clients’ wellbeing, and it seems that it might be more effective for older participants and with shorter practices (measured as total minutes of practice).
Klíčová slova:
Database searching – Depression – Undergraduates – Publication ethics – Test statistics – Gratitude – Happiness
Zdroje
1. Seligman MEP, Csikszentmihalyi M. Positive Psychology: An Introduction. Am Psychol. 2000;55: 5–14. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.5 11392865
2. Sin NL, Lyubomirsky S. Enhancing Well-Being and Alleviating Depressive Symptoms With Positive Psychology Interventions: A Practice-Friendly Meta-Analysis. J Clin Psychol. 2009;65: 467–487. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20593 19301241
3. Bolier L, Haverman M, Westerhof GJ, Riper H, Smit F, Bohlmeijer E. Positive psychology interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Public Health. 2013;13: 1.
4. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Erlbaum; 1988.
5. King LA. The health benefits of writing about life goals. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 2001;27: 798–807.
6. Loveday PM, Lovell GP, Jones CM. The Best Possible Selves Intervention: A Review of the Literature to Evaluate Efficacy and Guide Future Research. J Happiness Stud. Springer Netherlands; 2016; 1–22. doi: 10.1007/s10902-016-9824-z
7. Malouff JM, Schutte NS. Can psychological interventions increase optimism? A meta-analysis. J Posit Psychol. 2016;12: 1–11. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1221122
8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6: e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 19621072
9. Scheier MF, Wrosch C, Baum A, Cohen S, Martire LM, Matthews KA, et al. The life engagement test: Assessing purpose in life. J Behav Med. 2006;29: 291–298. doi: 10.1007/s10865-005-9044-1 16565785
10. Meevissen YM, Peters ML, Alberts HJ. Become more optimistic by imagining a best possible self: Effects of a two week intervention. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2011;42: 371–378. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2011.02.012 21450262
11. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988;54: 1063–1070. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063 3397865
12. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J Pers Assess. 1985;49: 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 16367493
13. Seligson JL, Huebner ES, Valois RF. Preliminary Validation of the Brief Multidimensional Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale (BMSLSS). Soc Indic Res. 2003;61: 121–145. doi: 10.1023/A:1021326822957
14. Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R, Platt S, Joseph S, Weich S, et al. The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007;5: 63. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-5-63 18042300
15. Lyubomirsky S, Lepper HS. A Measure of Subjective Happiness: Preliminary Reliability and Construct Validation. Soc Indic Res. 1999;46: 137–155. doi: 10.1023/A:1006824100041
16. Hanssen MM, Peters ML, Vlaeyen JWS, Meevissen YMC, Vancleef LMG. Optimism lowers pain: evidence of the causal status and underlying mechanisms. Pain. Netherlands; 2013;154: 53–58. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2012.08.006 23084002
17. Scheier MF, Carver CS, Bridges MW. Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A reevaluation of the Life Orientation Test. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;67: 1063–1078. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.67.6.1063 7815302
18. Hanssen MM, Vancleef LM, Peters ML. What does it mean to be an optimist in an ambiguous world? Investigating negative versus positive interpretation patterns of optimists [Internet]. University of Maastricht. 2014. https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/portal/files/728202/guid-1c673de5-2ce0-4b00-b64b-deaf21599d99-ASSET1.0
19. Seligman ME, Abramson LY, Semmel A, von Baeyer C. Depressive attributional style. J Abnorm Psychol. 1979;88: 242–247. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.88.3.242 500951
20. Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1: 385–401.
21. Laux L, Hock M, Bergner-Köther R, Hodapp V, Renner K-H. Das state-trait-angstdepressions- inventar (STADI). Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2013.
22. Beck AT, Steer RA, Brown GK. Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory-II. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation; 1996.
23. Lyubomirsky S, Layous K. How Do Simple Positive Activities Increase Well-Being? Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2013;22: 57–62. doi: 10.1177/0963721412469809
24. Nelson SK, Della Porta MD, Jacobs Bao K, Lee HC, Choi I, Lyubomirsky S. ‘It’s up to you’: Experimentally manipulated autonomy support for prosocial behavior improves well-being in two cultures over six weeks. J Posit Psychol. 2015;10: 463–476. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.983959
25. Layous K, Lee H, Choi I, Lyubomirsky S. Culture Matters When Designing a Successful Happiness-Increasing Activity. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2013;44: 1294–1303. doi: 10.1177/0022022113487591
26. Boehm JK, Lyubomirsky S, Sheldon KM. A longitudinal experimental study comparing the effectiveness of happiness-enhancing strategies in Anglo Americans and Asian Americans. Cogn Emot. 2011;25: 1263–1272. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2010.541227 21432648
27. Thompson RB, Peura C, Gayton WF. Gender differences in the person-activity fit for positive psychology interventions. J Posit Psychol. 2015;10: 179–183. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.927908
28. Sánchez-Meca J, López-Pina JA, López-López JA, Marín-Martínez F, Rosa-Alcázar AI, …, et al. Analysis of the concordance between scales to assess the methodological quality of primary studies in meta-analysis. Analysis of the concordance between scales to assess the methodological quality of primary studies in meta-analysis. Tenerife; 2013.
29. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, Kessels AG, Boers M, Bouter LM, et al. The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51: 1235–41. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00131-0 10086815
30. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0 [Updated March 2011]. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
31. Rubio-Aparicio M, Marín-Martínez F, Sánchez-Meca J, López-López JA. A methodological review of meta-analyses of the effectiveness of clinical psychology treatments. Behav Res Methods. 2017; 1–17.
32. Morris SB. Estimating Effect Sizes From Pretest-Posttest-Control Group Designs. Organ Res Methods. 2008;11: 364–386. doi: 10.1177/1094428106291059
33. Davis DE, Choe E, Meyers J, Wade N, Varjas K, Gifford A, et al. Thankful for the little things: A meta-analysis of gratitude interventions. J Couns Psychol. 2016;63: 20–31. doi: 10.1037/cou0000107 26575348
34. Borenstein M, Hedges L V., Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2010;1: 97–111. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.12 26061376
35. Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F. Confidence Intervals for the Overall Effect Size in Random-Effects Meta-Analysis. Psychol Methods. 2008;13: 31–48. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.13.1.31 18331152
36. Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2000;56: 455–63. 10877304
37. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327: 557–560. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 12958120
38. Rubio-Aparicio M, Sánchez-Meca J, López-López JA, Botella J, Marín-Martínez F. Analysis of categorical moderators in mixed-effects meta-analysis: Consequences of using pooled versus separate estimates of the residual between-studies variances. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2017;70: 439–456. doi: 10.1111/bmsp.12092 28164265
39. Viechtbauer W, López-López JA, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F. A comparison of procedures to test for moderators in mixed-effects meta-regression models. Psychol Methods. 2015;20: 360–374. doi: 10.1037/met0000023 25110905
40. Knapp G, Hartung J. Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate. Stat Med. 2003;22: 2693–2710. doi: 10.1002/sim.1482 12939780
41. López-López JA, Marín-Martínez F, Sánchez-Meca J, Van den Noortgate W, Viechtbauer W. Estimation of the predictive power of the model in mixed-effects meta-regression: A simulation study. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2014;67: 30–48. doi: 10.1111/bmsp.12002 23297709
42. Aguinis H, Gottfredson RK, Wright TA. Best-practice recommendations for estimating interaction effects using meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. 2011;32: 1033–1043. doi: 10.1002/job.719
43. Viechtbauer W. Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package. J Stat Softw. 2010;36: 1–48. doi: 10.18637/jss.v036.i03
44. Boselie JJLM, Vancleef LMG, Peters ML. The effects of experimental pain and induced optimism on working memory task performance. Scand J Pain. 2016;12: 25–32. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.03.001 28850487
45. Harrist S, Carlozzi BL, McGovern AR, Harrist AW. Benefits of expressive writing and expressive talking about life goals. J Res Pers. 2007;41: 923–930. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.09.002
46. Layous K, Nelson SK, Lyubomirsky S. What Is the Optimal Way to Deliver a Positive Activity Intervention? The Case of Writing About One’s Best Possible Selves. J Happiness Stud. 2013;14: 635–654. doi: 10.1007/s10902-012-9346-2
47. Summerfield T. Positive Interventions: : A comparison of the effects of three good things, best possible selves and a control task of early memories on dispositional gratefulness, life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect [Internet]. University of Derby. 2015. https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/599279/
48. Meevissen Y, Peters M, Alberts H. Overcoming ego depletion: The effects of an optimism manipulation on repeated acts of self-control. BMC complementary and alternative medicine. 2012. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clcentral/articles/275/CN-01030275/frame.html
49. Odou N, Vella-Brodrick DA. The Efficacy of Positive Psychology Interventions to Increase Well-Being and the Role of Mental Imagery Ability. Soc Indic Res. 2013;110: 111–129. doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9919-1
50. Peters ML, Vieler JSE, Lautenbacher S. Dispositional and induced optimism lead to attentional preference for faces displaying positive emotions: An eye-tracker study. J Posit Psychol. 2016;11: 258–269. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2015.1048816
51. Renner F, Schwarz P, Peters ML, Huibers MJH. Effects of a best-possible-self mental imagery exercise on mood and dysfunctional attitudes. Psychiatry Res. 2014;215: 105–110. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2013.10.033 24252218
52. Liau AK, Neihart MF, Teo CT, Lo CHM. Effects of the Best Possible Self Activity on Subjective Well-Being and Depressive Symptoms. Asia-Pacific Educ Res. 2016;25: 473–481.
53. Sheldon KM, Lyubomirsky S. How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. J Posit Psychol. 2006;1: 73–82. doi: 10.1080/17439760500510676
54. Peters ML, Flink IK, Boersma K, Linton SJ. Manipulating optimism: Can imagining a best possible self be used to increase positive future expectancies? J Posit Psychol. 2010;5: 204–211. doi: 10.1080/17439761003790963
55. Peters ML, Meevissen YMC, Hanssen MM. Specificity of the Best Possible Self intervention for increasing optimism: Comparison with a gratitude intervention. Ter Psicol. 2013;31: 93–100. doi: 10.4067/S0718-48082013000100009
56. Maddalena CJ, Saxey-Reese R, Barnes EL. Targeting writing interventions to emotional processing level: a factorial experimental design. Qual Quant. 2014;48: 2939–2962.
57. Boselie JJLM, Vancleef LMG, Peters ML. The effects of experimental pain and induced optimism on working memory task performance. Scand J Pain. 2016;12: 25–32. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.03.001 28850487
58. Enrique Á, Bretón-López J, Molinari G, Baños RM, Botella C. Efficacy of an adaptation of the best possible self intervention implemented through positive technology: A randomized control trial. Appl Res Qual Life. 2017; 1–19.
59. Geschwind N, Meulders M, Peters ML, Vlaeyen JWS, Meulders A. Can experimentally induced positive affect attenuate generalization of fear of movement-related pain? J Pain. 2015;16: 258–269. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2014.12.003 25536535
60. Boselie JJLM, Vancleef LMG, Smeets T, Peters ML. Increasing optimism abolishes pain-induced impairments in executive task performance. Pain. 2014;155: 334–340. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.10.014 24145210
61. Lyubomirsky S, Dickerhoof R, Boehm JK, Sheldon KM. Becoming happier takes both a will and a proper way: An experimental longitudinal intervention to boost well-being. Emotion. 2011;11: 391–402. doi: 10.1037/a0022575 21500907
62. Boselie JJLM, Vancleef LMG, Peters ML. Increasing Optimism Protects Against Pain-Induced Impairment in Task-Shifting Performance. J Pain. 2017;18: 446–455. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2016.12.007 28039101
63. Manthey L, Vehreschild V, Renner K-H. Effectiveness of Two Cognitive Interventions Promoting Happiness with Video-Based Online Instructions. J Happiness Stud. 2016;17: 319–339.
64. Ng W. Use of positive interventions: Does neuroticism moderate the sustainability of their effects on happiness? J Posit Psychol. 2016;11: 51–61.
65. Troop NA, Chilcot J, Hutchings L, Varnaite G. Expressive writing, self-criticism, and self-reassurance. Psychol Psychother Theory, Res Pract. 2013;86: 374–386. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8341.2012.02065.x 24217863
66. Yogo M, Fujihara S. Working memory capacity can be improved by expressive writing: A randomized experiment in a Japanese sample. Br J Health Psychol. 2008;13: 77–80. doi: 10.1348/135910707X252440 18230236
67. Lipsey MW, Wilson DB. The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment. Confirmation from meta-analysis. Am Psychol. 1993;48: 1181–209. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8297057 doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.48.12.1181 8297057
68. Diener E, Lucas RE, Scollon CN. Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. Am Psychol. 2006;61: 305–314. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.305 16719675
69. Crawford JR, Henry JD. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. Br J Clin Psychol. 2004;43: 245–265. 15333231
70. Thompson ER. Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). J Cross Cult Psychol. 2007;38: 227–242. doi: 10.1177/0022022106297301
71. López-Gómez I, Hervás G, Vázquez C. Adaptación de las “escalas de afecto positivo y negativo” (panas) en una muestra general Española. Behav Psychol Psicol Conduct. 2015;23: 529–548.
72. Weiss LA, Westerhof GJ, Bohlmeijer ET. Can we increase psychological well-being? The effects of interventions on psychological well-being: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2016;11. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158092 27328124
73. Peterson RA. On the Use of College Students in Social Science Research: Insights from a Second-Order Meta-analysis. J Consum Res. 2001;28: 450–461. doi: 10.1086/323732
74. Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A. The weirdest people in the world? Behav Brain Sci. 2010;33: 61–83. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X 20550733
75. Hedges L V., Tipton E, Johnson MC. Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Res Synth Methods. 2010;1: 39–65. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.5 26056092
76. Van den Noortgate W, López-López JA, Marín-Martínez F, Sánchez-Meca J. Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes: a multilevel approach. Behav Res Methods. 2015;47: 1274–1294. doi: 10.3758/s13428-014-0527-2 25361866
Článok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS One
2019 Číslo 9
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
- Nejasný stín na plicích – kazuistika
- Masturbační chování žen v ČR − dotazníková studie
- Úspěšná resuscitativní thorakotomie v přednemocniční neodkladné péči
- Fixní kombinace paracetamol/kodein nabízí synergické analgetické účinky
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- Graviola (Annona muricata) attenuates behavioural alterations and testicular oxidative stress induced by streptozotocin in diabetic rats
- CH(II), a cerebroprotein hydrolysate, exhibits potential neuro-protective effect on Alzheimer’s disease
- Comparison between Aptima Assays (Hologic) and the Allplex STI Essential Assay (Seegene) for the diagnosis of Sexually transmitted infections
- Assessment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activity using CareStart G6PD rapid diagnostic test and associated genetic variants in Plasmodium vivax malaria endemic setting in Mauritania