Mindfulness (2015) 6:1211–1218 DOI 10.1007/s12671-014-0383-2
ORIGINAL PAPER
Mindfulness Facets Predict Helping Behavior and Distinct Helping-Related Emotions C. Daryl Cameron & Barbara L. Fredrickson
Published online: 6 January 2015 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015
Abstract Contemplative practices have long emphasized the development of mindfulness: a skill that involves presentfocused attention and nonjudgmental acceptance of experiences. In the current study, we examine the relationship between these two facets of mindfulness—which are independent in novices—and helping behavior and its emotional correlates. Attention and acceptance each predicted selfreported engagement in real-world helping behavior. Additionally, present-focused attention predicted increased positive emotions during helping—such as love/closeness, moral elevation, and joy—but did not predict negative emotions. By contrast, nonjudgmental acceptance predicted decreased negative emotions during helping—such as stress, disgust, and guilt—but did not predict positive emotions. When helping others, it appears to take two processes—attention and acceptance—to support our intention and reap the richest emotional consequences. Keywords Mindfulness . Helping behavior . Altruism
Introduction Contemplative practices have long emphasized the development of mindfulness: nonjudgmental, receptive attention to experiences in the present moment (Brown et al. 2007). One C. D. Cameron (*) Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, E11 Seashore Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA e-mail:
[email protected] B. L. Fredrickson Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA
of the most well known definitions of mindfulness involves two components (Bishop et al. 2004). The first component is present-focused attention: regulating attention so that it focuses on current experiences (Bishop et al. 2004; Brown et al. 2007; Holzel et al. 2011). Empirical research shows that present-focused attention involves the ability to sustain attention to a single stimulus, to switch attention between stimuli, and to forestall ruminative elaboration on current experiences (Holzel et al. 2011). The second component of mindfulness is nonjudgmental acceptance of experiences: the ability to approach experiences with open-minded interest and curiosity, even if they are unpleasant (Bishop et al. 2004). Studies of clinical and nonclinical populations reveal that nonjudgmental acceptance enables people to meet mental experiences without overreacting (Hayes et al. 2006; Holzel et al. 2011; Linehan 1993). Present-focused attention and nonjudgmental acceptance have both been theorized to allow for greater awareness and control of thought and behavior (Bishop et al. 2004; Holzel et al. 2011). Among untrained novices, present-focused attention (often assessed via the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire observe subscale) and nonjudgmental acceptance (often assessed via the FFMQ nonjudging subscale) are not correlated (Baer et al. 2006; Coffey et al. 2010; Dekeyser et al. 2008). Attention and acceptance are, however, positively correlated for experienced meditators (Baer et al. 2008), suggesting that meditation practice may foster integration between these mindfulness subcomponents. Many contemplative scholars have argued that mindfulness can increase compassion and pro-social behavior (Dalai Lama and Ekman 2008). One way to specify this relationship is to consider distinct emotions that arise in helping contexts. In many situations, people automatically empathize with others, where empathy is defined as vicarious sharing of others’ affective states (Decety 2011; Preston and de Waal 2002). This empathic response can transition into different emotional
1212
states, of which two have received the most empirical attention: compassion and distress (Batson 2011; Klimecki and Singer 2012). Compassion refers to other-oriented feelings of care and concern for others (Batson 2011; Decety 2011; Goetz et al. 2010; Klimecki and Singer 2012). Distress refers to an aversive, self-oriented response (Batson 2011; Klimecki and Singer 2012). Whereas compassion leads people to help others even at cost to themselves, distress leads people to escape from helping situations if able to do so (Batson 2011; Klimecki and Singer 2012). Helping should be most common among people who are able to maximize compassion while minimizing distress (Klimecki and Singer 2012). Existing research suggests that mindfulness may be useful in this regard. Medical students who took part in an 8-week mindfulness-based stress reduction course showed increased compassion and decreased distress (Shapiro et al. 1998). Similarly, participants who took part in 8-week training in either mindfulness or compassion meditation were more likely than active control participants to offer their seat to a confederate on crutches (Condon et al. 2013). Training novices in loving-kindness meditation—which fosters present-focused attention to compassion—increases positive emotions and social connections over time (Fredrickson et al. 2008). In another study, novice meditators initially responded to scenes of human suffering with self-reported negative affect and activation of brain areas that past research has linked to distress; after loving-kindness meditation training, these novices responded to human suffering with increased self-reported positive affect and activation of brain areas that past research has linked to compassion (Klimecki et al. 2013). Finally, 2-week compassion meditation (vs. cognitive reappraisal) training led to increased charitable behavior in an economic redistribution game and decreased amygdala response (that past work links to distress) and increased anterior insula response (that past work links to compassion) in response to depictions of human suffering (Weng et al. 2013). We believe that further unpacking mindfulness into present-focused attention and nonjudgmental acceptance of experiences will enrich understanding of the relationship between mindfulness, compassion, distress, and helping, especially in the general population of those who have not benefited from mind training. First, present-focused attention should predict increased positive emotions during helping—such as compassion, joy, and moral elevation—but be unrelated to negative emotions during helping, such as distress, disgust, and guilt. People tend to report being less happy when they have been mind wandering rather than focusing attention on the present moment (Killingsworth and Gilbert 2010). Attending to the present moment also increases the ability to up-regulate and savor positive emotions (Quoidback et al. 2010). Studies reveal that present-focused attention increases mental self-awareness, which allows more nuanced empathy and perspective taking for others (Decety 2011; Dekeyser
Mindfulness (2015) 6:1211–1218
et al. 2008; Holzel et al. 2011). Present-focused attention has also been theorized to give people greater flexibility to focus on important aspects of the situation (Garland and Fredrickson 2013; Hayes et al. 2006). Present-focused attention may highlight positive features of helping, such as consequences for those who are helped (Garland and Fredrickson 2013). Broadened attention to these aspects of the situation could inspire more positive emotions in turn, creating an upward spiral of broadened situational awareness and other focus (Garland and Fredrickson 2013). If present-focused attention is associated with increased positive emotions, then it should also predict greater likelihood of helping others (Isen 1987). Past research is equivocal on the relationship between presentfocused attention and negative emotions; some studies find a positive correlation (Baer et al. 2006; Coffey et al. 2010)—because attending to negative emotions may amplify their intensity—whereas other studies do not (Dekeyser et al. 2008). On the other hand, we predict that nonjudgmental acceptance of experiences will be associated with reduced negative emotions during helping—such as distress—but be unrelated to positive emotions such as compassion. Accepting experiences nonjudgmentally may be a general marker of psychological health and has been linked empirically with reduced distress (Baer et al. 2006; Coffey et al. 2010; Dekeyser et al. 2008; Kashdan et al. 2006; Shallcross et al. 2013). For instance, work by Shallcross et al. (2013) found that age-related declines in anger and anxiety—measured as emotional traits, physiological responses to stress, and daily emotion experiences—were each mediated by age-related increases in acceptance. Many clinical treatments encourage people to accept their experiences, so that they do not engage in experiential avoidance that further compounds distress and suffering (Hayes et al. 2006; Kashdan et al. 2006; Linehan 1993). Within helping situations, nonjudgmental acceptance may allow people to disengage from their negative emotions and focus on those in need of help (Coffey et al. 2010). Acceptance may enable people to reinterpret the helping context as less threatening, forestalling self-focused distress (Bishop et al. 2004). If nonjudgmental acceptance is associated with reduced negative emotions, then it should also predict greater likelihood of helping others. In the current study, we tested whether two components of mindfulness—attention and acceptance, which are uncorrelated in those without mind training—predicted engagement in real-world helping behavior. Additionally, we tested whether these components of mindfulness would relate to different valences of emotions during helping. We had three hypotheses: 1. Present-focused attention and nonjudgmental acceptance would be independently associated with greater likelihood of engaging in helping behavior.
Mindfulness (2015) 6:1211–1218
2. For those participants who help others, present-focused attention would predict increased positive emotions during helping. 3. For those participants who help others, nonjudgmental acceptance would predict reduced negative emotions during helping.
Method Participants Participants were 313 adults who responded to a request to participate in a research project on reactions to everyday events. They were compensated $10 for completing a survey online. The sample included 222 women and 91 men. There were 241 White participants, 41 Black participants, 22 Asian participants, and 9 participants who did not list their race. The average age was 44 years old (SD=15.07 years; range 21– 87 years), and average income was between $45,000 and $54, 999 (minimum income=$0–14,999; maximum=$85,000+). We used a two-phase instruction check designed to verify that participants were following study instructions (Oppenheimer et al. 2009). Procedure All participants gave informed consent prior to participating in the study. After providing consent, participants completed all measures online. Measures and Data Analysis Helping Behavior As part of a larger life event measure called the event reconstruction method (ERM), participants were asked to describe a recent instance in which they had helped someone: “Think of the last time you helped someone for at least 20 min or more (e.g., voluntarily assisting someone else with a home repair project, listening to someone who needs to talk, not a required activity for school or job). Take a moment to recall and mentally relive this event, including how the event unfolded, what time of day it was, and what it was like. First, please briefly describe the event (a sentence or phrase is enough).” Then, participants completed our binary helping variable: “As indicated by my response above, (1) I do engage in this activity even if only on occasion, or (0) generally, I do not engage in this activity.” Thus, although everyone recalled a helping event, this dichotomous variable assessed general likelihood of engaging in helping behavior. In the event reconstruction method, participants also reported engagement in other behaviors that were not the focus of the current research: eating a nutritious meal, eating an unhealthy meal, engaging in
1213
physical activity, watching television, going outdoors, having sex, learning something new, drinking alcohol, sitting, interacting socially, getting ready, hugging someone, working, and commuting. Emotions During Helping If participants indicated that they had engaged in helping behavior, they completed follow-up questions about emotions during the helping event that they had described (using the modified Differential Emotions Scale; Fredrickson 2013). These items had the form of “What is the most X you felt” (from 0=not at all to 4= extremely). Each emotion was assessed via a combination of three terms. Positive emotions included the following: amused, fun loving, and silly; awe, wonder, and amazement; grateful, appreciative, and thankful; hopeful, optimistic, and encouraged; inspired, uplifted, and elevated; interested, alert, and curious; joyful, glad, and happy; love, closeness, and trust; proud, confident, and self-assured; and serene, content, and peaceful. Negative emotions included the following: angry, irritated, and annoyed; ashamed, humiliated, and disgraced; contemptuous, scornful, and disdainful; disgust, distaste, and revulsion; embarrassed, self-conscious, and blushing; guilty, repentant, and blameworthy; hate, distrust, and suspicion; sad, downhearted, and unhappy; scared, fearful, and afraid; and stressed, nervous, and overwhelmed. Within this study, love/closeness/trust most closely corresponded to compassion, and stressed/nervous/ overwhelmed most closely corresponded to distress. To test hypotheses 2 and 3, we constructed composites of positive emotions (α=0.93) and negative emotions (α=0.86), which were negatively correlated (r=−0.13, p=0.04). Carolina Empirically Derived Mindfulness Inventory In the current study, we utilized a 22-item scale that was empirically derived by Coffey et al. (2010) to capture the Bishop et al. (2004) definition of mindfulness as involving both attention to the present moment and nonjudgmental acceptance of experiences. They drew upon items from the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ; Baer et al. 2006) and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz and Roemer 2004). Factor analyses revealed the presence of two independent factors: a present-focused attention factor comprised the FFMQ observe subscale (e.g., “I pay attention to how my emotions affect my thoughts and behaviors”), and a nonjudgmental acceptance factor comprised the FFMQ nonjudging subscale (e.g., “I criticize myself for having irrational or inappropriate emotions”; reverse-coded) and DERS nonacceptance subscale (e.g., “When I’m upset, I become irritated with myself for feeling that way”; reverse-coded). The Carolina Empirically Derived Mindfulness Inventory (CEDMI) was chosen instead of the original FFMQ because it was statistically evaluated to capture distinct mindfulness mechanisms (present-focused attention and nonjudgmental
1214
acceptance; Bishop et al. 2004). In the current sample, present-focused attention (α=0.84) and nonjudgmental acceptance (α=0.94) were uncorrelated (r=−.05, p=0.38). Emotion Reports Participants were asked to rate the degree to which they had experienced a variety of emotions over the prior 2-week period, using the same modified Differential Emotions Scale as earlier (Fredrickson 2013). Participants were told: “Please think back to how you felt these past 2 weeks, and how often you experienced the following emotions” (0=not at all, 1=hardly, 2=some of the time, 3=often, 4=most of the time). Savoring Beliefs As another measure of present-focused attention and nonjudgmental acceptance, participants completed the Savoring Beliefs Inventory (Bryant 2003), a 24-item self-report measure of savoring experiences (e.g., “I know how to make the most of a good time,” “I feel fully able to appreciate good things that happen to me”).
Results In our sample, 85 % of participants reported engaging in helping behavior. Example behaviors included listening to a friend’s problems, giving advice, babysitting, helping out with housework or homework, providing a car ride, fixing something at no cost, donating to charity, and volunteering in the local community. We conducted a logistic regression predicting engagement in helping behavior. On the first step, we entered gender, age, and annual income as demographic predictors. Men were marginally less likely than women to report engaging in helping behavior, B=−0.57, SE=0.35, Wald=2.71, p=0.10. Age did not predict helping, B=0.01, SE=0.01, Wald=0.51, p=0.48. Participants with higher income were more likely to report helping others, B=1.86, SE= 0.18, Wald=104.00, p0.11). Whereas nonjudgmental acceptance did not predict positive emotions, β=0.01, p=0.83, present-focused attention did, β= 0.22, p0.60), but age was associated with reduced negative emotions, β=−0.14, p=0.04. Whereas present-focused attention did not predict negative emotions, β=0.02, p=0.73, nonjudgmental acceptance was associated with reduced negative emotions, β = −0.25, p
