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.