Relationship between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status among university students: A meta-analysis
Authors:
Tomonari Irie aff001; Kengo Yokomitsu aff003; Yuji Sakano aff004
Authors place of work:
School of Education and Culture, Hokusho University, Hokkaido, Japan
aff001; Graduate School of Psychological Science, Health Sciences University of Hokkaido, Hokkaido, Japan
aff002; College of Comprehensive Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Osaka, Japan
aff003; School of Psychological Science, Health Sciences University of Hokkaido, Hokkaido, Japan
aff004
Published in the journal:
PLoS ONE 14(9)
Category:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223310
Summary
Cognitive behavioral therapy is an effective treatment for improving mental health problems among university students. However, intervention components have different effects on mental health problems. This paper is a meta-analysis of the data concerning the relationship between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status among university students. A total of five electronic databases were reviewed, and 876 articles met the initial selection criteria. Reviewers applied standardized coding schemes to extract the correlational relationship between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status. A total of 55 articles were included in the meta-analysis. Correlations were found for three cognitive behavioral variables (attention, thought, and behavior) across nine mental health domains (negative affect, positive affect, happiness, social function, stress response, psychological symptom, quality of life, well-being, and general health). Across each cognitive behavioral process and all mental health domains, the estimated mean correlation was medium (r = .32 - .46), and varied by the domain of mental health.
Keywords:
Behavior – Psychological stress – Mental health and psychiatry – Cognition – Behavioral and social aspects of health – attention – Happiness
Introduction
Mental health problems among university students is an important issue. Auerbach et al. analyzed data on mental health problems of university students in each country using the World Mental Health Surveys [1]. The results indicated that university students suffering from psychiatric disorders were reluctant to attend university and were unable to receive appropriate treatment. Steptoe et al. investigated the extent of depressive symptoms in 17,348 university students between the ages of 17 and 30 in 23 countries [2]. They found that the prevalence of severe depressive symptoms was 38% in university students from East Asia (e.g., Japan, Korea), 13.9% for men and 17.1% for women from Western countries. Therefore, establishing and managing a support system in universities that focuses on mental health problems has become an important issue.
Mental health problems among university students have negative influences on academic performance and social function. Richardson et al. conducted a meta-analysis of 217 studies that examined the relationship between mental health status and academic performance [3]. This analysis revealed that the intensity of general stress has a negative impact on academic performance. Weissman et al. investigated the influence of depressive and anxiety symptoms on daily life in adolescence and on social life throughout adulthood [4]. This study showed that depressive and anxiety symptoms in adolescence influenced their job turnover rate and the likelihood that they will remain unmarried.
The WHO definition of health emphasizes not only the absence of illness but also positive aspects such as social functioning and well-being [5]. Keyes classified the positive aspects of mental health in terms of hedonia and positive functioning [6]. Specifically, hedonia includes “experiencing positive affect” and “avowing happiness or life satisfaction”; in addition, positive functioning includes “social acceptance,” “social actualization,” “social contribution,” “social coherence,” “social integration,” “personal growth,” “purpose in life,” “autonomy,” “environmental mastery,” “self-acceptance,” and “positive relationships with others.” Furthermore, showing “personal growth,” “purpose in life,” “autonomy,” “environmental mastery,” “self-acceptance,” and “positive relationships with others” are components of well-being [7]. Therefore, in order to measure mental health, it is necessary to assess not only the general health condition including psychological symptoms or stress responses related to mental illness indicated by WHO, but also affective state, happiness, social functioning, and well-being.
Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is widely applied as a psychological approach to promote good mental health in university students. Charlesworth et al. examined the effect of relaxation training on state and trait anxiety in 18 college students [8]. The results indicated that relaxation training reduces trait anxiety. Perna et al. (1998) examined the effect of cognitive behavioral stress management program on the mood states in 34 university students [9]. The results showed that cognitive behavioral stress management program reduces dysphoric mood states. Rosenzweig et al. examined the effect of mindfulness training on mood states for 302 university students in their sophomore year [10]. They found that mindfulness training reduces dysphoric mood states. Levin et al. examined the effect of web-based acceptance and commitment therapy on the academic concerns and well-being of 79 college students [11]. The results indicated that acceptance and commitment therapy improved concerns about academic learning and social well-being.
CBT is an effective approach to improve mental health in university students. CBT includes many therapeutic components and outcome measures. Harvey et al. pointed out that there are five cognitive behavioral variables that can be applied to cognitive behavioral therapy (i.e., attention, memory, reasoning, thought, and behavior [12]). Attention includes variables such as selective attention and mindfulness. Memory includes variables such as overgeneral memory and memory distrust. Reasoning includes variables such as interpretation and attribution. Thought includes variables such as rumination and belief. Behavior includes variables such as avoidance and coping. These five variables are not disorder specific, and are applied in the transdiagnostic approach [12]. Conley et al. conducted a systematic review on the effects of psychological interventions for promoting mental health in university students [13]. The results indicated that mindfulness training is more effective than CBT, relaxation training, and meditation. Furthermore, CBT was found to be more effective than relaxation training and meditation.
Each component of psychological approaches to mental health problems of university students has a different effect. The outcome measures of cognitive behavioral variables that affect the mental health problems of university students have not been verified. Less than one in five adolescents who are in need of treatment receive appropriate psychological interventions [14]. To improve access to effective psychological interventions, it may be useful to develop a brief intervention [15]. In this way, the student counseling center at universities can offer psychological interventions during semester term [16,17]. Identifying cognitive behavioral variables that strongly influences mental health status is important for developing an effective protocol. In the present study, we aim to conduct an analysis to identify cognitive behavioral variables that influence mental health status in university students.
Method
Definition of terms
First, we defined cognitive behavioral variables according to Harvey et al’s definition [12]. The definition is as follows: (1) attention, (2) memory, (3) reasoning, (4) thought, and (5) behavior. Second, we defined mental health according to WHO’s definition of health and Keyes’s definition of positive aspects of mental health [5,6]. The definition is as follows: (1) negative affect, (2) positive affect, (3) happiness, (4) social function, (5) stress response, (6) psychological symptom, (7) quality of life (QOL), (8) well-being, and (9) general health.
Search strategy
We identified relevant articles in multiple electronic databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, and CENTRAL). In addition, we used the SIGLE and PsyEXTRA databases to search grey literature. The search included articles published in English from the earliest date available to June 11, 2019 in each database. The selected search terms were “universities,” “college,” “undergraduate,” “mental processes,” “adaptation, psychological,” “attitude,” “attention,” “psychology,” and “mental health.” After the database search, we also searched the reference sections of the articles for additional sources. Additionally, the Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms, created by the American Psychological Association, can be used as a type of thesaurus search in PsycINFO. Therefore, we utilized this additional tool when searching PsycINFO to obtain all possible references in addition to the above-mentioned terminologies.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Studies included for meta-analysis met the following criteria: (1) written in English, (2) samples were specifically college or junior college students, (3) assessed a bivariate relationship between mental health status and cognitive behavioral variables, (4) reported an effect size, or a statistic that can be calculated, measuring the bivariate association between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status, and (5) published in a peer-reviewed journal. It also included baseline data for intervention studies. Studies were excluded if their samples were psychiatric patients.
Screening procedures
Based on the inclusion criteria, two independent raters evaluated “include,” “exclude,” and “unsure” for each article. The value of Kappa indicates fair agreement (κ = .47) [18]. Of the 876 articles extracted using the electronic search, we rejected 616 articles for which both the raters evaluated “exclude.” This resulted in 260 articles, of which 27 articles received the same “include” evaluation by both raters, 66 articles received the same “unsure” evaluation by both raters, and 167 articles were evaluated as either “include” or “unsure” by either rater. There were 18 duplicates among the 260 articles. Therefore, we searched the reference sections of the 242 articles. As a result of the reference section search, we extracted 38 new articles. Two raters independently read the full texts of the 280 articles and judged whether they should be subject to meta-analysis. The inter-rater disagreement were resolved by discussion between the raters once they reached a consensus. Furthermore, as defined above, cognitive behavioral measures were categorized as attention, memory, reasoning, thought, or behavior, mental health measures were categorized as negative affect, positive affect, happiness, social function, stress response, psychological symptom, QOL, well-being, or general health. The inter-rater classification differences were resolved by discussions between raters based on the definition and a consensus was reached. A total of 55 articles were selected for the meta-analysis (Table 1). Fig 1 presents the procedure used to extract the articles.
Meta-analytic procedures
This study targeted investigations reporting on the bivariate relationship between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status. Therefore, multivariable measures of association, such as regression coefficients, were excluded because they are not directly comparable to measures of bivariate association [74]. A meta-analysis was conducted for each combination of cognitive behavioral process and mental health status. When multiple outcomes were used in the study, the effect sizes were extracted for each combination of classifications if the combination of classifications was different (e.g., combination of automatic thoughts and positive affect [thought and positive affect], and combination of automatic thoughts and depressive symptoms [thought and psychological symptoms]). When the effect size was reported in the same combination, it was integrated into the research (e.g., combination of automatic thoughts and depressive symptoms [thought and psychological symptoms] and combination of automatic thoughts and anxiety symptoms [thought and psychological symptoms]). To integrate the effect size, we used Fisher’s z scale weighted for sample size. Cohen’s standard definition of small (.10), medium (.30), and large (.50) effect sizes were used to interpret the effect size findings [75]. In a meta-analysis, clinical and statistical heterogeneity are inevitable because subjects and areas differ depending on the study [76]. Therefore, we used the random effect model to calculate the effect size. Furthermore, we calculated I2 [76], and the statistical heterogeneity of the research included in the meta-analysis was confirmed. If we detected a large heterogeneity, then we conducted a subgroup analysis based on the classification of mental health status (i.e., positive affect, negative affect etc.). To confirm publication bias, we examined the symmetry of the funnel plot using a linear regression test [77] and the trim and fill method [78]. For all analyses, we used the R version 3.4.1 [79]. We used the metafor package [80] to integrate effect size and examine the symmetry of the funnel plot.
Results
Characteristics of included studies
We extracted three categories of cognitive behavioral variables, “attention,” “thought,” and “behavior”, and all categories of mental health based on reading the full-text. The variables of “memory” and “reasoning” were not extracted. Table 1 presents the characteristics of the included studies. Furthermore, Table 2 presents the results of the classification, and Table 3 presents the scales used in each classification.
As Table 2 indicates, “behavior” (29 studies, 48 effect sizes) is the most common cognitive behavioral variable related to mental health status. The second most common is “thought” (23 studies, 33 effect sizes) and the third is “attention” (20 studies, 36 effect sizes). “Psychological symptom” (32 studies, 41 effect sizes) is the most common mental health category related to the cognitive behavioral variables. Psychological symptoms included “depressive symptoms,” “anxiety symptoms,”“pathological worry,” “post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms,” and the like (details are shown in Table 3). The second most common is “stress response” (14 studies, 17 effect sizes) and the third is “negative affect” (13 studies, 17 effect sizes). Table 4 shows the meta-analysis results for each classification.
Relationship between attention and mental health status
Studies on attention measured the awareness of personal experiences such as body sensation, thought, and emotion (e.g., mindfulness, metacognitive awareness). Table 4 and Fig 2 present a medium correlation between attention and mental health status (r = .34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .30 to .38). Because we observed a large statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 91.8%), we conducted a subgroup analysis based on the classification of mental health status.
Six studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and negative affect. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a medium correlation between attention and negative affect (r = -.39, 95% CI = −.47 to −.31). Two studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and positive affect. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a small or medium correlation between attention and positive affect (r = .23, 95% CI = .15 to .31). Four studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and happiness. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a small or medium correlation between attention and happiness (r = .28, 95% CI = .15 to .41). Five studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and stress response. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a medium correlation between attention and stress response (r = −.35, 95% CI = −.45 to −.25). Nine studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and psychological symptom. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a medium correlation between attention and psychological symptom (r = −.32, 95% CI = −.46 to −.18). Two studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and QOL. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a medium correlation between attention and QOL (r = .32, 95% CI = .23 to .40). Three studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and well-being. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a medium correlation between attention and well-being (r = .39, 95% CI = .31 to .47). Four studies reported a bivariate relationship between attention and general health. The results of this meta-analysis indicate a medium correlation between attention and general health (r = .32, 95% CI = .17 to .48). We did not conduct subgroup analysis because only one study reported a bivariate relationship between attention and social function.
Relationship between thought and mental health status
Studies on thought measured thinking variables (e.g., automatic thoughts, irrational belief). Table 4 and Fig 3 present a medium or large correlation between thought and mental health status (r = .46, 95% CI = .39 to .53). Because we observed a large statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 96.5%), we conducted a subgroup analysis based on the classification of mental health status.
Seven studies reported a bivariate relationship between thought and negative affect. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium or large correlation between thought and negative affect (r = .46, 95% CI = .35 to .58). Six studies reported a bivariate relationship between thought and stress response. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a large correlation between thought and stress response (r = .54, 95% CI = .31 to .77). Fifteen studies reported a bivariate relationship between thought and psychological symptom. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium or large correlation between thought and psychological symptom (r = .43, 95% CI = .32 to .54). Four studies reported a bivariate relationship between thought and general health. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium correlation between thought and general health (r = −.36, 95% CI = −.40 to −.32). We did not conduct subgroup analysis because no studies or only one study reported a bivariate relationship between positive affect, happiness, social function, QOL, and well-being.
Relationship between behavior and mental health status
Studies on behavior measured coping processes of external or internal experiences (e.g., problem-solving coping, commitment). Table 4 and Fig 4 presents a medium correlation between behavior and mental health status (r = .33, 95% CI = .27 to .38). Because a large statistical heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 95.2%), we conducted a subgroup analysis based on the classification of mental health status.
Four studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and negative affect. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a small or medium correlation between thought and negative affect (r = −.40, 95% CI = −.63 to −.17). Three studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and positive affect. There is no significant correlation between behavior and positive affect as a result of integrating the effect size (r = .21, 95% CI = −.07 to .49). Three studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and happiness. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium correlation between behavior and happiness (r = .39, 95% CI = .23 to .56). Four studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and social function. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a small correlation between behavior and social function (r = .19, 95% CI = .07 to .31). Six studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and stress response. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium or large correlation between behavior and stress response (r = −.47, 95% CI = −.55 to −.39). Seventeen studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and psychological symptom. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium correlation between behavior and psychological symptom (r = −.29, 95% CI = −.40 to −.19). Three studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and well-being. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a small or medium correlation between behavior and well-being (r = .23, 95% CI = .17 to .29). Seven studies reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and general health. As a result of integrating the effect size, we found a medium correlation between behavior and general health (r = .38, 95% CI = .29 to .47). We did not conduct a subgroup analysis because only one study reported a bivariate relationship between behavior and QOL.
Reporting bias
We assessed the risk of reporting bias through visual inspection and linear regression tests of funnel plots [77]. Because it has been argued that the test for funnel plot asymmetry should be used only when there are at least 10 studies [18], we only conducted a linear regression test when there were over 10 studies. With the linear regression test, asymmetry of the funnel plot was detected in studies that reported bivariate relations between attention and mental health status (p < .001). Based on the trim and fill method, the uncorrected effect size (before adding the possible missing studies) is .34 (95% CI = .30 to .38), and the corrected effect size (after adding six possible missing studies) is .32 (95% CI = .28 to .36). Although there is evidence of publication bias, its effect is not significant (Fig 5).
Black circles: included studies, White circles: added possible missing studies using Trim and Fill methods.
Discussion
This study is the first meta-analysis of the relationship between cognitive behavior variables and mental health status in university students. We found that the overall correlation coefficients between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status were medium (attention: r = .32; thought: r = .46; behavior: r = .33). However, we detected a large heterogeneity (attention: I2 = 91.8%; thought: I2 = 96.5%; behavior: I2 = 96.0%), which means that the effect sizes likely depend on mental health status, while cognitive behavioral variables are related to mental health status. Therefore, we classified mental health as “negative affect,” “positive affect,” “happiness,” “social function,” “stress response,” “psychological symptom,” “QOL,” “well-being,” and “general health” and conducted a meta-analysis on them.
As Table 4 shows, attention has larger effect sizes than behavior in relation to well-being. For positive affect and QOL, attention shows significant effect sizes, but thought and behavior do not. Thought has larger effect sizes than attention and behavior on negative affect, stress response, and psychological symptom. In social function, behavior shows significant effect sizes, but attention and thought do not. These findings suggest that attention is related to the positive aspects of mental health such as well-being, and thought is related to the negative aspects of mental health such as negative affect. Behavior is related to social function, but attention and thought are not.
As mentioned above, this study identifies cognitive behavioral variables that are strongly related to the mental health status in university students. Next, we review how these cognitive behavioral variables have been used in existing psychotherapy. To develop effective psychological intervention methods, we will consider what kind of future research is necessary.
These results support previous studies that examined the effects of psychological treatment. First, the classification of attention in this study includes mindfulness and metacognitive awareness (e.g., Mindful Attention Awareness Scale [81], Metacognition Questionnaire [84]). As techniques to promote mindfulness and metacognitive awareness, mindfulness-based psychotherapy [163], attention training [164], and computer-based training to train attention [165] are available [12]. Mindfulness-based psychotherapy is the most frequently reported and effective technique by clinical trials and meta-analyses [166–168]. Mindfulness is defined as “paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally” [169]. Several clinical trials and meta-analyses report that mindfulness-based psychotherapy is effective when it creates positive aspects in mental health [170,171]. Furthermore, integrating 23 meta-analyses that reported on the effectiveness of mindfulness-based psychotherapy revealed that mindfulness-based psychotherapy not only improved depressive symptoms (standard mean difference (SMD) = −.37) and anxiety symptoms (SMD = −.48) but also promoted QOL (SMD = −.39) [172]. In previous research, while the subjects were not purely university students, mindfulness-based psychotherapy not only improved the negative aspects of mental health but also promoted the positive aspects. In addition, in the present study, the attention process was correlated with positive aspects of mental health in university students [25,26,28], suggesting that psychological interventions targeting the attention process may be effective when promoting positive mental health in this population.
Second, the classification of thought in this study includes automatic thoughts and dysfunctional belief (e.g., Automatic Thought Questionnaire-Negative [99], Dysfunctional Belief and Attitudes about Sleep Scale [90]). Cognitive therapy is a technique to improve automatic thoughts and dysfunctional belief [12]. Cognitive therapy is a psychological treatment focused on thought that improves depressive symptoms and supports clients by observing and considering the thought processes [173]. The Society of Clinical Psychology reported that cognitive therapy is an effective treatment for depression [174]. A meta-analysis suggests that the cognitive therapy treatment of depression has a higher remission rate as opposed to no intervention (Odds Ratio = 0.42) [175]. Another meta-analysis shows that cognitive therapy improves generalized anxiety and social anxiety [176,177]. In previous research, while subjects were not purely university students, cognitive therapy improved the negative aspects of mental health. In the present study, the thought process was correlated with the negative aspects of mental health in university students [33,57]; so psychological interventions targeting the thought process may be effective treatments for the negative aspects of mental health in this population.
Third, the classification of behavior in this study included coping and commitment (e.g., Brief COPE Inventory [109], Acceptance and Action Questionnaire [108]). As techniques to promote coping and commitment, behavioral activation and acceptance and commitment therapy are available [12]. Behavioral activation is a psychological treatment that focuses on increased engagement in adaptive activities, decreased engagement in activities that maintain depression or increased risk of depression, and solving problems that limit access to rewards or that maintain or increase aversive control [178]. Acceptance and commitment therapy is a psychological treatment that focuses on decreasing experiential avoidance and increasing action along the valued direction [179]. Behavioral activation and acceptance and commitment therapy are effective in improving social dysfunctions because they aim to resolve problems by focusing on real-life behavior. In randomized controlled trials, behavioral activation and acceptance and commitment therapy are shown to be effective against social dysfunction (behavioral activation: d = 1.21 [180]; acceptance and commitment therapy: partial η2 = .22 [181]). In previous research, while subjects were not purely university students, behavior activation and acceptance and commitment therapy improved social dysfunction. In the present study, the behavior process was correlated with the social function in university students [43,58], therefore, psychological interventions that target the behavior process may be effective when it comes to social dysfunction in university students. As mentioned above, when providing psychological interventions to university students, it would be best to provide psychotherapy that focuses on the attention, thought, and behavior variables that target mental health problems.
This meta-analysis is not without limitations. First, we detected a large heterogeneity in the studies included in the meta-analysis. The heterogeneity did not affect the results of the present study because this meta-analysis used the random effect model. However, future studies must consider heterogeneities among university students. Studies focusing on university students have at times taken into consideration several demographic variables, such as a student’s major [182]. In contrast, some studies were conducted without considering the differences in demographics [183]. These differences in demographics may affect the results of the analysis [22]. In addition, because the present study extracted only English articles, which is an international language, the influence of the cultural background could not be verified. In the future, it is necessary to analyze the data pertaining to each demographic, including cultural background, and accumulate the findings. Furthermore, we could not conduct a meta-analysis on some of the classifications because we could not extract the required amount of data. Therefore, some relationships between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status were unclear (e.g., thought and positive aspects of mental health [positive affect, happiness, QOL, and well-being]); it will be necessary to try and resolve this issue in the future.
Conclusion
The present study is the first to examine the relationship between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status among university students using meta-analysis. The findings reveal that cognitive behavioral variables are overall correlated with mental health status. Therefore, psychological treatment based on CBT is effective for solving mental health problems among university students. Psychological treatment, including thought process, can be effective in treating the negative aspects of mental health, and the attention process can be effective in treating the positive aspects of mental health. However, this meta-analysis could not reveal some of the relationships between cognitive behavioral variables and mental health status.
In summary, psychological treatment based on CBT is effective in solving mental health problems among university students. However, outcomes vary, and several factors influence them. Therefore, when examining the effects of psychological treatment on university students, various outcomes should be included.
Supporting information
S1 Table [doc]
PRISMA checklist.
Zdroje
1. Auerbach RP, Alonso J, Axinn WG, Cuijpers P, Ebert DD, Green JG, et al. Mental disorders among college students in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. Psychol Med. 2016;46(14):2955–70. doi: 10.1017/S0033291716001665 27484622
2. Steptoe A, Tsuda A, Tanaka Y, Wardle J. Depressive symptoms, socio-economic background, sense of control, and cultural factors in university students from 23 countries. Int J Behav Med. 2007;14(2):97–107. 17926438
3. Richardson M, Abraham C, Bond R. Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2012;138(2):353–87. doi: 10.1037/a0026838 22352812
4. Weissman MM, Wolk S, Wickramaratne P, Goldstein RB, Adams P, Greenwald S et al. Children with prepubertal-onset major depressive disorder and anxiety grown up. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1999;56(9):794–801. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.56.9.794 12884885
5. World Health Organization. Constitution of the World Health Organization [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2017 Feb 25]. Available from: http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf
6. Keyes CLM. Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73(3):539–48. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.539 15982151
7. Ryff CD. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;57(6):1069–81.
8. Charlesworth E, Murphy S, Beutler L. Stress management skill for nursing students. J Clin Psychol. 1981;37(2):284–90. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198104)37:2<284::aid-jclp2270370210>3.0.co;2-8 6112243
9. Perna F, Antoni M, Kumar M, Cruess D, Schneiderman N. Cognitive-behavioral intervention effects on mood and cortisol during exercise training. Ann Behav Med. 1998;20(2):92–8. doi: 10.1007/BF02884454 9989314
10. Rosenzweig S, Reibel DK, Greeson JM, Brainard GC, Hojat M. Mindfulness-based stress reduction lowers psychological distress in medical students. Teach Learn Med. 2003;15(2):88–92. doi: 10.1207/S15328015TLM1502_03 12708065
11. Levin M, Haeger J, Pierce B, Twohig M. Web-based acceptance and commitment therapy for mental health problems in college students: A randomized controlled trial. Behav Modif. 2017;41(1):141–62. doi: 10.1177/0145445516659645 27440189
12. Harvey AG, Watkins E, Mansell W, Shafran R. Cognitive Behavioural Processes Across Psychological Disorders: A transdiagnostic approach to research and treatment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.
13. Conley CS, Durlak JA, Dickson DA. An evaluative review of outcome research on universal mental health promotion and prevention programs for higher education students. J Am Coll Heal. 2013;61(5):286–301.
14. Merikangas KR, He JP, Burstein M, Swendsen J, Avenevoli S, Case B, et al. Service utilization for lifetime mental disorders in U.S. adolescents: Results of the national comorbidity surveyAdolescent supplement (NCS-A). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011;50(1):32–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.10.006 21156268
15. Taylor L, Waite P, Halldorsson B, Percy R, Violato M, Creswell C. Protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility study examining the efficacy of brief cognitive therapy for the Treatment of Anxiety Disorders in Adolescents (TAD-A). Trials. 2019;20(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3101-x
16. Mowbray CT, Megivern D, Mandiberg JM, Strauss S, Stein CH, Collins K, et al. Campus mental health services: Recommendations for change. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2006;76(2):226–37. doi: 10.1037/0002-9432.76.2.226 16719642
17. McIndoo CC, File AA, Preddy T, Clark CG, Hopko DR. Mindfulness-based therapy and behavioral activation: A randomized controlled trial with depressed college students. Behav Res Ther [Internet]. 2016;77:118–28. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2015.12.012 26745622
18. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of intervention. England, UK: Wiley; 2008.
19. Anderson CA, Arnoult LH. An examination of perceived control, humor, irrational beliefs, and positive stress as moderators of the relation between negative stress and health. Basic Appl Soc Psych. 1989;10(2):101–17.
20. Berking M, Poppe C, Luhmann M, Wupperman P, Jaggi V, Seifritz E. Is the association between various emotion-regulation skills and mental health mediated by the ability to modify emotions? Results from two cross-sectional studies. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2012;43(3):931–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2011.09.009 22406495
21. Bettis AH, Coiro MJ, England J, Murphy LK, Zelkowitz RL, Dejardins L, et al. Comparison of two approaches to prevention of mental health problems in college students: Enhancing coping and executive function skills. J Am Coll Heal [Internet]. 2017;65(5):313–22. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2017.1312411
22. Birks Y, McKendree J, Watt I. Emotional intelligence and perceived stress in healthcare students: A multi-institutional, multi-professional survey. BMC Med Educ. 2009;9:61. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-9-61 19761603
23. Bodenlos JS, Wells SY, Noonan M, Mayrsohn A. Facets of dispositional mindfulness and health among college students. J Altern Complement Med. 2015;21(10):645–52. doi: 10.1089/acm.2014.0302 26352341
24. Bowlin SL, Baer RA. Relationships between mindfulness, self-control, and psychological functioning. Pers Individ Dif. 2012;52(3):411–5.
25. Brittian AS, Kim SY, Armenta BE, Lee RM, Umaña-Taylor AJ, Schwartz SJ, et al. Do dimensions of ethnic identity mediate the association between perceived ethnic group discrimination and depressive symptoms? Cult Divers Ethn Minor Psychol. 2015;21(1):41–53.
26. Calogero RM, Pina A. Body guilt: Preliminary evidence for a further subjective experience of self-objectification. Psychol Women Q. 2011;35(3):428–40.
27. Chen AC, Szalacha LA, Menon U. Perceived discrimination and its associations with mental health and substance use among Asian American and Pacific Islander undergraduate and graduate students. J Am Coll Heal. 2014;62(6):390–8.
28. Coffey KA, Hartman M, Fredrickson BL. Deconstructing mindfulness and constructing mental health: Understanding mindfulness and its mechanisms of action. Mindfulness (N Y). 2010;1(4):235–53.
29. Costa H, Ripoll P, Sánchez M, Carvalho C. Emotional intelligence and self-efficacy: Effects on psychological well-being in college students. Span J Psychol. 2013;16.
30. Deng Y, Li S, Tang Y, Zhu L, Ryan RM, Brown KW. Psychometric properties of the Chinese translation of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS). Mindfulness (N Y). 2011;3(1):10–4.
31. Disch WB, Harlow LL, Campbell JF, Dougan TR. Student functioning, concerns, and socio-personal well-being. Soc Indic Res. 2000;51(1):41–74.
32. Flett AL, Haghbin M, Pychyl TA. No TitleProcrastination and depression from a cognitive perspective: An exploration of the associations among procrastinatory automatic thoughts, rumination, and mindfulness. J Ration Cogn Ther. 2016;43(3):169–86.
33. Gilbert BD, Christopher MS. Mindfulness-based attention as a moderator of the relationship between depressive affect and negative cognitions. Cogn Ther Res. 2009;34(6):514–21.
34. Griva F, Anagnostopoulos F. Positive psychological states and anxiety: The mediating effect of proactive coping. Psychol Rep. 2010;107(3):795–804. doi: 10.2466/02.20.PR0.107.6.795-804 21323138
35. Hintz S, Frazier P, Meredith L. Evaluating an online stress management intervention for college students. J Couns Psychol. 2015;62(2):137–47. doi: 10.1037/cou0000014 24635586
36. Hipwell M. Models of health enhancing and illness provoking factors in mental health [Internet]. Queen Margaret University; 2005. Available from: http://etheses.qmu.ac.uk/166/
37. Hovey JD, Seligman LD. Religious coping, family support, and negative affect in college students. Psychol Rep. 2007;100:787–8. doi: 10.2466/pr0.100.3.787-788 17688095
38. Iwasaki Y. No TitleRoles of leisure in coping with stress among university students: A repeated-assessment field study. Anxiety Stress Coping. 2003;16(1):31–57.
39. Jayalakshmi V, Magdalin S. Emotional intelligence, resilience and mental health of women college students. J Psychosoc Res. 2015;10(2):401–8.
40. Khan ZH, Watson PJ, Chen Z. Muslim spirituality, religious coping, and reactions to terrorism among Pakistani university students. J Relig Health. 2016;55(6):2086–98. doi: 10.1007/s10943-016-0263-2 27255263
41. Kim PY, Kendall DL, Webb M. Religious coping moderates the relation between racism and psychological well-being among Christian Asian American college students. J Couns Psychol. 2015;62(1):87–94. doi: 10.1037/cou0000055 25602609
42. Kneeland ET, Dovidio JF. Emotion Malleability Beliefs and Coping With the College Transition. Emotion. 2019;
43. Koesten J, Schrodt P, Ford D. Cognitive flexibility as a mediator of family communication environments and young adults’ well-being. Health Commun. 2009;24(1):82–94. doi: 10.1080/10410230802607024 19204861
44. Kraemer KM, Bryan EM, McLeish AC. Intolerance of uncertainty as a mediator of the relationship between mindfulness and health anxiety. Mindfulness (N Y). 2016;7(4):859–65.
45. Krafft J, Haeger JA, Levin ME. Comparing cognitive fusion and cognitive reappraisal as predictors of college student mental health. Cogn Behav Ther [Internet]. 2019;48(3):241–52. Available from: doi: 10.1080/16506073.2018.1513556 30230428
46. Lihua Z, Gui C, Yanghua J. Self-compassion and confucian coping as a predictor of depression and anxiety in impoverished Chinese undergraduates. Psychol Rep. 2017;120(4):627–38.
47. Luo Y, Wang H. Correlation research on psychological health impact on nursing students against stress, coping way and social support. Nurse Educ Today. 2009;29(1):5–8. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2008.05.019 18692281
48. Mahmoud JS, Staten R, Hall LA, Lennie TA. The relationship among young adult college students’ depression, anxiety, stress, demographics, life satisfaction, and coping styles. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2012;33(3):149–56. doi: 10.3109/01612840.2011.632708 22364426
49. Marino C, Vieno A, Lenzi M, Fernie BA, Nikčević A V., Spada MM. Personality traits and metacognitions as predictors of positive mental health in college students. J Happiness Stud. 2016;
50. Masuda A, Tully EC. The role of mindfulness and psychological flexibility in somatization, depression, anxiety, and general psychological distress in a nonclinical college sample. J Evidence-Based Complement Altern Med. 2012;17(1):66–71.
51. Masuda A, Wendell JW. Mindfulness mediates the relation between disordered eating-related cognitions and psychological distress. Eat Behav. 2010;11(4):293–6. doi: 10.1016/j.eatbeh.2010.07.001 20850066
52. Masuda A, Anderson PL, Sheehan ST. Mindfulness and mental health among African American college students. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med. 2009;14(3):115–27.
53. Masuda A, Price M, Anderson P, Wendell JW. Disordered eating-related cognition and psychological flexibility as predictors of psychological health among college students. Behav Modif. 2010;34(1):3–15. doi: 10.1177/0145445509351569 20051522
54. Mayorga NA, Jardin C, Bakhshaie J, Garey L, Viana AG, Cardoso JB, et al. Acculturative stress, emotion regulation, and affective symptomology among Latino/a college students. J Couns Psychol. 2018;65(2):247–58. doi: 10.1037/cou0000263 29543479
55. Moeller RW, Seehuus M. Loneliness as a mediator for college students’ social skills and experiences of depression and anxiety. J Adolesc [Internet]. 2019;73(March):1–13. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.03.006
56. Montes-Berges B, Augusto JM. Exploring the relationship between perceived emotional intelligence, coping, social support and mental health in nursing students. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2007;14:163–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2007.01059.x 17352779
57. de Oliveira IR, Seixas C, Osório FL, Crippa JAS, de Abreu JN, Menezes IG, et al. Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Distortions Questionnaire (CD-Quest) in a sample of undergraduate students. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2015;12(7–8):20–7. 26351620
58. Ranjbar M, Bayani AA, Bayani A. Social problem solving ability predicts mental health among undergraduate students. Int J Prev Med. 2013;4(11):1337–41. 24404372
59. Sanchez D, Adams WN, Arango SC, Flannigan AE. Racial-ethnic microaggressions, coping strategies, and mental health in Asian American and Latinx American college students: A mediation model. J Couns Psychol. 2018;65(2):214–25. doi: 10.1037/cou0000249 29543476
60. Sanchez D, Smith L V., Adams W. The relationships among perceived discrimination, marianismo gender role attitudes, racial-ethnic socialization, coping styles, and mental health outcomes in Latina College Students. J Lat Psychol. 2018;6(1):1–15.
61. Sasaki M, Yamasaki K. Dispositional and situational coping and mental health status of university students. Psychol Rep. 2005;97(3):797–809. doi: 10.2466/pr0.97.3.797-809 16512298
62. Shapiro SL, Brown KW, Thoresen C, Plante TG. The moderation of Mindfulness-based stress reduction effects by trait mindfulness: results from a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Psychol. 2011;67(3):267–77. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20761 21254055
63. Su Y, Chen S. Emerging posttraumatic growth: A prospective study with pre- and posttrauma psychological predictors. Psychol Trauma Theory, Res Pract Policy. 2015;7(2):103–11.
64. Thanoi W, Klainin-Yobas P. Assessing rumination response style among undergraduate nursing students: A construct validation study. Nurse Educ Today. 2015;35(5):641–6. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2015.01.001 25614016
65. Tucker RP, Wingate LR, O’ Keefe VM. Historical loss thinking and symptoms of depression are influenced by ethnic experience in American Indian college students. Cult Divers Ethn Minor Psychol. 2016;22(3):350–8.
66. Vand HDA, Gharraee B, Farid AA, Bandi MG. Prediction of insomnia severity based on cognitive, metacognitive, and emotional variables in college students. Explor J Sci Heal. 2014;10(4):233–40.
67. Wang S, Wong YJ, Yeh K. Relationship harmony, dialectical coping, and nonattachment: Chinese indigenous well-being and mental health. Couns Psychol. 2016;44(1):78–108.
68. Wang G, Liu L, Tan X, Zheng W. The moderating effect of dispositional mindfulness on the relationship between materialism and mental health. Pers Individ Dif [Internet]. 2017;107(March):131–6. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.11.041
69. Wong SS. Balanced states of mind in psychopathology and psychological well-being. Int J Psychol. 2010;45(4):269–77. doi: 10.1080/00207591003683090 22044012
70. Wong YJ, Tsai P, Liu T, Zhu Q, Wei M. Male Asian international students’ perceived racial discrimination, masculine identity, and subjective masculinity stress: a moderated mediation model. J Couns Psychol. 2014;61(4):560–9. doi: 10.1037/cou0000038 25111707
71. Woodruff SC, Glass CR, Arnkoff DB, Crowley K, Hindman RK, Hirschhorn EW. Comparing self-compassion, mindfulness, and psychological inflexibility as predictors of psychological health. Mindfulness (N Y). 2013;5(4):410–21.
72. Zawadzki MJ, Boals A, Mathews N, Schuler K, Southard-Dobbs S, Smyth JM. The relationship between perseverative cognitions and mental health and physical health complaints among college students. Cogent Psychol [Internet]. 2018;5(1):1–11. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2018.1475878
73. Zhou L, Chen J, Liu X, Lu D, Su L. Negative cognitive style as a mediator between self-compassion and hopelessness depression. Soc Behav Pers. 2013;41(9):1511–8.
74. Becker BJ, Wu M. The Synthesis of Regression Slopes in Meta-Analysis. Stat Sci. 2007;22(3):414–29.
75. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associaets; 1988.
76. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses Testing for heterogeneity. BMJ [Internet]. 2003;327(7414):557–60. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12958120%0Ahttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=PMC192859%0Ahttps://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.dbproxy.umfiasi.ro/pmc/articles/PMC192859/pdf/3270557.pdf doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 12958120
77. Egger M, Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical. Bmj. 1997;315:629–34. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 9310563
78. Duval S, Tweedie R. A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis. J Am Stat Assoc. 2000;95(449):89–98.
79. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2019 Feb 1]. Available from: https://www.r-project.org/
80. Viechtbauer W. Package ‘metafor’ [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Feb 21]. Available from: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/metafor/metafor.pdf
81. Brown KW, Ryan RM. The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84(4):822–48. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 12703651
82. Baer RA, Smith GT, Hopkins J, Krietemeyer J, Toney L. Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment. 2006;13(1):27–45. doi: 10.1177/1073191105283504 16443717
83. Salovey P, Mayer JD, Goldman S, Turvey C, Palfai T. Emotional attention, clarity, and repair: exploring emotional intelligence using the trait meta-mood scale. In: Pennebaker JD, editor. Emotion, disclosure, and health. Washington: American Psychological Association; 1995.
84. Cartwright-Hatton S, Wells A. Beliefs about worry and intrusions: The Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire and its correlates. J Anxiety Disord. 1997;11(3):279–96. 9220301
85. Berking M, Znoj H. Entwicklung und Validierung eines Fragebogens zur standardisierten Selbsteinschätzung emotionaler Kompetenzen (SEK-27). [Development and validation of the emotion-regulation skills questionnaire (ERSQ-27)]. Zeitschrift für Psychiatr Psychol und Psychother. 2008;56:141e152.
86. Feldman G, Hayes A, Kumar S, Greeson J, Laurenceau J. Mindfulness and emotion regulation: The development and initial validation of the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R). J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2007;29:177–90.
87. Neff KD. The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self Identity. 2003;2:223–50.
88. Schmeck RR. Learning style of college students. In: Dillon R, Schmeck RR, editors. Individual Differences in Cognition. New York: Academic Press; 1983.
89. McKinley NM, Hyde JS. The Objectified Body Consciousness Scale. Psychol Women Q. 1996;20(2):181–215.
90. Morin CM. Insomnia: Psychological Assessment and Management. New York: Guilford Press; 1993.
91. Frazier P, Keenan N, Anders S, Perera S, Schallcross S, Hintz S. Perceived past, present, and future control and adjustment to stressful life events. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011;100(4):749–65. doi: 10.1037/a0022405 21299308
92. Nolen-Hoeksema S, Morrow J. A prospective study of depression and posttraumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster: The 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1991;61(1):115–21. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.61.1.115 1890582
93. Nolen-Hoeksema S, Parker LE, Larson J. Ruminative coping with depressed mood following loss. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;67(1):92–104. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.67.1.92 8046585
94. Freeston MH, Rhéaume J, Letarte H, Dugas MJ, Ladouceur R. Why do people worry? Pers Individ Dif. 1994;17(6):791–802.
95. Buhr K, Dugas MJ. The intolerance of uncertainty scale: Psychometric properties of the English version. Behav Res Ther. 2002;40(8):931–45. doi: 10.1016/s0005-7967(01)00092-4 12186356
96. Mizes JS, Christiano B, Madison J, Post G, Seime R, Varnado P. Development of the Mizes Anorectic Cognitions Questionnaire-Revised: Psychometric properties and factor structure in a large sample of eating disorder patients. Int J Eat Disord. 2000;28(4):415–21. 11054788
97. Crandell CJ, Chambless DL. The validation of an inventory for measuring depressive thoughts: The Crandell Cognitions Inventory. Behav Res Ther. 1986;24(4):403–11. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(86)90005-7 3741306
98. Trapnell PD, Campbell JD. Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model of personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999;76(2):284–304. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.76.2.284 10074710
99. Hollon SD, Kendall PC. Cognitive self-statements in depression: Development of an automatic thoughts questionnaire. Cognit Ther Res. 1980;4(4):383–95.
100. Ingram RE, Wisnicki KS. Assessment of positive automatic cognition. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988;56(6):898–902. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.56.6.898 3204200
101. Malcarne VL, Chavira DA, Fernandez S, Liu P. The scale of ethnic experience: Development and psychometric properties. J Pers Assess. 2006;86(2):150–61. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8602_04 16599789
102. Sandhu DS, Asrabadi BR. Development of an acculturative stress scale for international students: Preliminary Findings. Psychol Rep. 1994;75(1):435–48.
103. Williams DR, Yu Y, Jackson JS, Anderson NB. Racial differences in physical and mental health: Socio-economic status, stress and discrimination. J Health Psychol. 1997;2(3):335–51. doi: 10.1177/135910539700200305 22013026
104. Treynor W, Gonzalez R, Nolen-Hoeksema N. Ruminative reconsiderd: A psychometric analysis. Cognit Ther Res. 2003;27(3):247–59.
105. Wegner DM, Zanakos S. Chronic Thought Suppression. J Pers. 1994;62(4):615–40.
106. Wells A, Davies MI. The thought control questionnaire: A measure of individual differences in the control of unwanted thoughts. Behav Res Ther. 1994;32(8):871–8. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)90168-6 7993332
107. Gillanders DT, Bolderston H, Bond FW, Dempster M, Flaxman PE, Campbell L, et al. The Development and Initial Validation of the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire. Behav Ther [Internet]. 2014;45(1):83–101. Available from: doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2013.09.001 24411117
108. Bond FW, Bunce D. The role of acceptance and job control in mental health, job satisfaction, and work performance. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(6):1057–67. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.6.1057 14640816
109. Carver CS. You want to measure coping but yout protocol’s too long: Consider the Brief COPE. Int J Behav Med. 1997;4:92–100. doi: 10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6 16250744
110. Schutte N, Malouff J, Hall L, Haggerty D, Cooper J, Golden C, et al. Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Pers Individ Dif. 1998;25(2):167–77.
111. Sasaki M, Yamasaki K. Development of a dispositional version of the General Coping Questionnaire (GCQ) and examination of its reliability and validity. Japanese J Public Heal. 2002;49(5):399–408.
112. Boudreaux E, Catz S, Amaral-Melendez M, Brantley PJ. The ways of Religious Coping Scale: Reliability, validity, and scale development. Assessment. 1995;2(3):233–44.
113. Wang X. A handbook of mental health measuring scale. Chinese Ment Heal J. 1999;12:318–20.
114. Gratz KL, Roemer L. Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2004;26(1):41–54.
115. Greenglass E. Proactive coping. In: Frydenberg E, editor. Beyond coping: Meeting goals, vision, and challenges. London: Oxford University Press; 2002. p. 37–62.
116. Pargament K, Feuille M, Burdzy D. The Brief RCOPE: Current psychometric status of a short measure of religious coping. Religions. 2011;2(1):51–76.
117. Martin MM, Rubin RB. A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychol Rep. 1995;76:623–6.
118. D’ Zurilla TJ, Maydeu-Olivares A, Gallardo-Pujol D. Predicting social problem solving using personality traits. Pers Individ Dif. 2011;50(2):142–7.
119. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Weintraub JK. Assessing coping strategies a theoretically based approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56(2):267–83. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.56.2.267 2926629
120. Riggio RE. Assessment of Basic Social Skills. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(3):649–60.
121. Tobin DL, Holroyd KA, Reynolds R V., Wigal JK. The hierarchical factor structure of the coping strategies inventory. Cognit Ther Res. 1989;13(4):343–61.
122. Li TR, Hou YB. Psychological structure and psychometric validity of the Confucian coping. J Educ Sci Hum Norm Univ. 2012;11:11–8.
123. Connor-Smith JK, Compas BE, Wadsworth ME, Thomsen AH, Saltzman H. Responses to stress in adolescence: Measurement of coping and involuntary stress responses. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000;68(6):976–92. 11142550
124. Cassidy T, Long C. Problem-solving style, stress and psychological illness: Development of a multifactorial measure. Br J Clin Psychol. 1996;35(265–277).
125. 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(6):1063–70. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1063 3397865
126. Crawford JR, Henry JD. Normative data and latent structure in a large non-clinical sample. Br J Clin Psychol. 2003;42:111–31. doi: 10.1348/014466503321903544 12828802
127. Thanoi W, Panitrat R, Phancharoenworakul K, Thompson E, Nityasuddhi D. The Adolescent Ruminative Response Scale Thai version: Psychometric properties. J Nurs Sci. 2011;29(3):29–38.
128. Thompson T, Dinnel DL, Dill NJ. Development and validation of a Body Image Guilt and Shame Scale. Pers Individ Dif. 2003;34:59–75.
129. Zuckerman M. The development of an affect adjective check list for the measurement of anxiety. J Consult Psychol. 1960;21:457–62.
130. Veit CT, Ware JE. The structure of psychological distress and well-being in general populations. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983;51(5):730–42. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.51.5.730 6630688
131. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The satisfaction with life scale. J Pers Assess. 1985;49(1):71–5. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 16367493
132. Fordyce MW. A review of research on the happiness measures: A sixty second index of happiness and mental health. Soc Indic Res. 1988;20(4):355–81.
133. Furlong MJ, You S, Renshaw TL, Smith DC, O’ Malley MD. Preliminary development and validation of the social and emotional health survey for secondary school students. Soc Indic Res. 2014;117(3):1011–32.
134. Ellison CW. Spiritual well-being: Conceptualization and measurement. J Psychol Theol. 1983;11:330–40.
135. Hills P, Argyle M. The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: A Compact scale of the measurement of psychological well-being. Pers Individ Dif. 2002;33(7):1073–82.
136. Ware JEJ, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care,. 1992;30(6):473–83.
137. Kwan VSY, Bond MH, Singelis TM. Pancultural explanations for life satisfaction adding relationship harmony to self-esteem. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997;73(5):1038–51. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.73.5.1038 9364759
138. Goldberg D. Manual of the general health questionnaire. Windsor, United Kingdom: National Foundation for Educational Research; 1978.
139. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;44(1):113–26.
140. Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983;24(4):385–96. 6668417
141. Locke BD, McAleavey AA, Zhao Y, Lei PW, Hayes JA, Castonguay LG, et al. Development and initial validation of the counseling center assessment of psychological symptoms-34. Meas Eval Couns Dev. 2012;45(3):151–69.
142. Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelsohn M, Mock J, Erbaugh J. An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961;4(6):561–71.
143. Beck AT, Epstein N, Brown G, Steer RA. An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988;56(6):893–7. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.56.6.893 3204199
144. Radloff LS. The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1(3):385–401.
145. Derogatis LR, Spencer PM. The brief symptom inventory: Administration, scoring and procedure manual. Riderwood, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research, Inc; 1982.
146. Metalsky GI, Joiner TEJ. The Hopelessness Depression Symptom Questionnaire. Cognit Ther Res. 1997;21(3):359–84.
147. Meyer TJ, Miller ML, Metzger RL, Borkovec TD. Development and validation of the penn state worry questionnaire. Behav Res Ther. 1990;28(6):487–95. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6 2076086
148. Mond JM, Hay PJ, Rodgers B, Owen C. Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q): Norms for young adult women. Behav Res Ther. 2006;44(1):53–62. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2004.12.003 16301014
149. Rost K, Burnam MA, Smith GR. Development of screeners for depressive disorders and substance disorder history. Med Care. 1993;31:189–200. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199303000-00001 8450677
150. Foa EB, Cashman L, Jaycox L, Perry K. The validation of a self-report measure of posttraumatic stress disorder: The Posttraumatic Diagnostic Scale. Psychol Assess. 1997;9(4):445–51.
151. Green DE, Walkey FH, McCormick IA, Taylor AJ. Development and evaluation of a 21-item version of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist with New Zealand and United States respondents. Aust J Psychol. 1988;40(1):61–70.
152. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams BW. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–13. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x 11556941
153. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JBW, Löwe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(10):1092–7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 16717171
154. Derogatis LR. Symptom Checklist-90-R: Administration, Scoring and Procedures Manual. Minneapolis: National Computer Systems Person, Inc.; 1994.
155. Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene RE. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1970.
156. Morey LC. The Personality Assessment Inventory professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1991.
157. Costello CG, Comrey AL. Scales for measuring depression and anxiety. J Psychol. 1967;66(2):303–13. doi: 10.1080/00223980.1967.10544910 6076427
158. Weathers FW, Litz BT, Herman DS, Huska JA, Keane TM. The PTSD Checklist (PCL): Reliability, validity, and diagnostic utility. In: Annual Convention of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. San Antonio, TX; 1993.
159. Watson D, O’Hara MW, Simms LJ, Kotov R, Chmielewski M, McDade-Montez EA, et al. Development and Validation of the Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms (IDAS). Psychol Assess. 2007;19(3):253–68. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.19.3.253 17845118
160. Skevington SM, Lotfy M, O’ Connell KA. The World Health Organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Qual Life Res. 2004;13(2):299–310. doi: 10.1023/B:QURE.0000018486.91360.00 15085902
161. Diener E. Subjective well-being. Psychol Bull. 1984;95(3):542–75. 6399758
162. 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. Heal Qual Life. 2007;5.
163. Segal Z V., Williams JMG, Teasdale JD. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression: A new approach to preventing relapse. New York: Guilford Press; 2002.
164. Wells A. Emotional disorders and metacognition: innovative cognitive therapy. Chichester: Wiley; 2000.
165. MacLeod C, Rutherford E, Campbell L, Ebsworthy G, Holker L. Selective attention and emotional vulnerability: Assessing the causal basis of their association through the experimental manipulation of attentional bias. J Abnorm Psychol. 2002;111(1):107–23. 11866165
166. Bohlmeijer E, Prenger R, Taal E, Cuijpers P. The effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction therapy on mental health of adults with a chronic medical disease: A meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2010;68(6):539–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.10.005 20488270
167. Chiesa A, Serretti A. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for stress management in healthy perpole: A review and meta-analysis. J Altern Complement Med. 2009;15(5):593–600. doi: 10.1089/acm.2008.0495 19432513
168. Khoury N, Sharma M, Rush SE, Fournier C. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for healthy individuals: A meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2015;78(6):519–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2015.03.009 25818837
169. Kabat-Zinn J. Wherever you go, there you are: Mindfulness meditation in everyday life. New York: Hyperion; 1994.
170. Lynch S, Gander M, Kohls N, Kudielka B, Walach H. Mindfulness-based coping with university life: A non-randomized wait-list-controlled pilot evaluation. Stress Heal. 2011;27(5):365–75.
171. Shapiro S. L., Brown K. W., & Biegel GM. Teaching self-care to caregivers: Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on the mental health of therapists in training. Train Educ Prof Psychol. 2007;1(2):105–15.
172. Gotink RA, Chu P, Busschbach JJV, Benson H, Fricchione GL, Hunink MGM. Standardised mindfulness-based interventions in healthcare: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):1–17.
173. Beck AT. Thinking and depression: II. Theory and therapy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1964;10(6):561–71.
174. Psychology S of C. Psychological Treatment: Division 12 of the American Psychological Association [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2017 Feb 20]. Available from: http://www.div12.org/psychological-treatments/
175. Jakobsen JC, Hansen JL, Storebø OJ, Simonsen E, Gluud C. The effects of cognitive therapy versus “no intervention” for major depressive disorder. PLoS One. 2011;6(12).
176. Hanrahan F., Field A. P., Jones F. W., & Davey GCL. A meta-analysis of cognitive therapy for worry in generalized anxiety disorder. Clin Psychol Rev. 2013;33(1):120–32. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2012.10.008 23168445
177. Ougrin D. Efficacy of exposure versus cognitive therapy in anxiety disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatry [Internet]. 2011;11(1):200. Available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/11/200
178. Dimidjian S, Barrera M Jr, R. MC, Munoz RF, Lewinsohn PM. The origins and current status of behavioral activation treatments for depression. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2011;7:1–38. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032210-104535 21275642
179. Harris R. Act made simple: An easy-to-read primer on acceptance and commitment therapy. Oakland: New Harbinger Publications; 2009.
180. Hopko DR, Armento MEA, Robertson SMC, Ryba MM, Carvalho JP, Colman LK, et al. Brief behavioral activation and problem-solving therapy for depressed breast cancer patients: Randomized trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011;79(6):834–49. doi: 10.1037/a0025450 21988544
181. Forman EM, Shaw JA, Goetter EM, Herbert JD, Park J, Yuen EK. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial comparing acceptance and commitment therapy and standard cognitive behavior therapy for anxiety and depression. Behav Ther. 2012;43(4):801–11. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2012.04.004 23046782
182. Kelley TM, Lambert EG. Mindfulness as a Potential Means of Attenuating Anger and Aggression for Prospective Criminal Justice Professionals. Mindfulness (N Y). 2012;3(4):261–74.
183. Waters TEA. Relations between the functions of autobiographical memory and psychological wellbeing. Memory. 2014;22(3):265–75. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2013.778293 23537126
Článek vyšel v časopise
PLOS One
2019 Číslo 9
- Mohou být tuzemská klíšťata přenašeči nebezpečného syndromu alfa-gal?
- Jaká je budoucnost xenotransplantací? Prasečí játra i ledviny poprvé transplantovány lidem
- Orální lichen planus v kostce: Jak v praxi na toto multifaktoriální onemocnění s různorodými symptomy?
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
- Esenciální fosfolipidy u nealkoholového postižení jater
Nejčtenější 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