Effects of mindfulness and movement on affect and vitality

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Increasing levels of distress and barriers to healthcare have coincided with increasing use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM). While mindfulness and movement interventions may improve wellbeing, little research has compared the effectiveness of these two approaches.

OBJECTIVE:

This single intervention study aimed to (1) explore the effects of two brief, online, self-administered mindfulness and movement interventions on affect and vitality, and (2) establish whether changes in affect and vitality could be predicted by age, gender, general distress, previous CAM experience and enjoyment of the intervention.

METHODS:

Participants (n = 62) were randomly allocated to follow a brief online mindfulness or movement intervention. Levels of affect (using PANAS) and subjective vitality (using the Subjective Vitality Scale) were measured pre and post intervention. Demographics, experience with CAM and general distress (using the DASS-21) were collected pre intervention, while level of enjoyment (using the ENJOY scale) was measured post intervention. Open-text responses gathered qualitative data on participant experience.

RESULTS:

Participants completing the mindfulness intervention reported increased vitality and decreased positive and negative affect. Those completing the movement intervention reported increased vitality and positive affect and decreased negative affect. Higher DASS-21 levels were predictive of greater reductions in negative affect. Higher levels of enjoyment were predictive of greater increases in positive affect and vitality.

CONCLUSIONS:

Differences between mindfulness and movement interventions may indicate that they could have targeted applications. While further research is necessary, these brief, online interventions may provide a sustainable, accessible self-management and wellbeing intervention.

Keywords

Mindfulness movement online intervention health affect psychology mental health

1 Introduction

Increased prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders in recent years, along with increasing barriers to healthcare, have presented widespread challenges for healthcare systems [1] and employers due to the interconnection between employee health and employee performance [2, 3]. Reductions in subjective wellbeing (SWB), which can be defined as the personal evaluation of the quality of one’s life experience, including affective reactions and cognitive judgments [4, 5] can result in increased levels of absenteeism and reductions in workplace performance [6]. Given the well-established relationship between health and SWB [7 –9], along with its role in health maintenance, healthy aging [10, 11] and workplace performance [12, 13], the United Nations have recognised the promotion of wellbeing as part of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals [14]. However, given increasing burdens placed on healthcare systems and employers [15], there is a clear need for readily accessible, self-administered, well-designed, low-cost interventions, to enhance wellbeing and workplace performance [16]. Online interventions have the potential to increase accessibility in this respect, being associated with fewer missed appointments and high levels of satisfaction [17].

It is within this context that interest in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) as a self-management method has increased among the general public, employers and healthcare providers [18]. For example, in recent years a large body of research evidence has accrued supporting the benefits of mindfulness [19]. However, in comparison to mindfulness interventions, movement interventions have received less research attention. The focus of movement interventions is to balance vital energy [18], a construct referred to as Qi in Chinese medicine [20] and Prana in Indian philosophy [21]. Interestingly, some research suggests that movement interventions are associated with higher SWB levels compared to mindfulness [22]. While diversity in mindfulness and movement interventions make comparison challenging [23], it may also improve the potential for meeting diverse population needs.

Despite a rise in mindfulness interventions in recent years, some research suggests there is a lack of clarity on the effectiveness of the interventions [24], with mindfulness being associated with higher costs and reduced benefits in some workplaces [25], while attrition rates suggest they may not be easily implemented [26]. Furthermore, individual differences, access barriers and post COVID blended workplace environments [27] may impact adherence to interventions and the potential benefits [28]. Barriers to CAM interventions may be systemic as attrition rates beyond 40% were dependent upon sociodemographic factors and health status, including depressive symptoms [29]. Additionally, time and financial constraints were identified as common barriers to participation [30, 31]. This is highlighted by figures which suggest that in the West, CAM interventions are most commonly practiced by those who identify as white, young to middle age and female, with higher socioeconomic status [17]. Additionally, lower attrition rates are correlated with being male, younger, increased well-being levels at baseline, higher treatment expectancy, and prior experience with mind-body interventions [32, 33]. To address some of these barriers, free, brief, online interventions may be useful. It is notable that lower attrition rates were found for online mindfulness interventions (3.8%) compared to those in-person (27.3%), suggesting that online interventions may be more accessible [34]. Despite fluctuating attrition rates, efficacy of online mindfulness and movement interventions are comparable to in-person interventions [17 , 35]. However, there is a scarcity of research on the efficacy of a single, self-administered online intervention.

Single session, brief audio mindfulness interventions ranging from 5 –15 mins, impact numerous health-related outcomes [36] and have the potential to lead to sustainable and positive health outcomes [37]. Brief interventions display comparable efficacy levels to longer interventions [38, 39]. Howarth [40] suggests that brief self-management interventions should be investigated, as the self-management model of care is integral to patient care. Shorter interventions may reduce participation barriers for those with busy work schedules, attention deficits or other restrictions [41]. As self-management skills and coping abilities are in high demand within the workplace and healthcare [42], research on easily accessible interventions in real time with relevant populations is necessary [43].

This study aimed to explore participant experience of a one time, brief online self-administered mindfulness and movement interventions and their effect on wellbeing, notably affect and vitality. Affect and vitality are important dimensions of wellbeing [44] with affect being an individual’s emotional experience which consists of positive and negative dimensions [45]. Vitality is defined as feeling full of life and energy, characterised by enthusiasm, aliveness, wellbeing and lack of fatigue and exhaustion [46] and vitality at work is an important factor for optimal functioning and sustainable employability [47]. Given known associations, this study also aimed to explore the role of gender, age, frequency and enjoyment of CAM practice, as well as general levels of distress as predictors of changes in affect and vitality.

2 Methods

2.1 Sample and design

This study used a multicomponent design, which included an experimental and exploratory aspect. Participants responded voluntarily to the recruitment request, thus the sampling method was self-selection and convenience. The study employed a double blind control using software to randomly allocate participants to either of the two distinct interventions. The mindfulness based intervention involved maintaining a still posture, with a focus on calming the mind, while the movement based intervention required physical movement and no attention on calming the mind. Additional controls employed in the study included participant anonymity and ecological validity through online self-paced participation and reduced opportunity for experimenter bias. Only participants who confirmed they were ≥18 years of age, not currently receiving treatment for psychological distress and provided informed consent were permitted to complete the study. The research received ethical approval from the Department of Psychology, Research Committee on 19th October 2021, there was no identifier number. Research recruitment material was shared on social media from the end of October through November 2021 and the online experiment links remained live from 2nd November to the 2nd December 2021.

2.2 Measures and procedure

Using Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Provo, UT), an online, anonymous survey (Appendix A) firstly collected demographic information (sex, age group and how often participants practiced a CAM technique).

The Positive and Negative Affect Scale Short Form (PANAS-SF) [48, 49] was then used to assess pre-intervention levels of positive and negative affect. This consists of ten items describing two dimensions of emotion. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale (1–5) with subscale scores ranging from 5–25. Higher scores reflect higher levels of positive and negative affect.

The Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS) [46] was used to assess state level subjective vitality. This consists of seven present moment statements reflective of vitality levels. Each item is rated on a 7-point scale (1–7). Item 2, “I don’t feel very energetic right now” was reverse coded. This scale has a minimum score of 7 (low vitality levels) and a maximum score of 49 (high vitality levels).

The Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21) [50] assessed depression, anxiety and stress levels before the intervention. Participants indicated how much each item applied to them over the past week using a 4-point Likert scale, (1–4). Higher scores indicated greater levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. To satisfy multicollinearity assumptions in regression analyses it was necessary to combine the subscales to calculate a total DASS-21 score [51]. A total DASS-21 score can provide a measure of general distress [52].

Participants were then randomly allocated to either the movement condition (n = 32) or the mindfulness condition (n = 30). Both conditions involved short CAM interventions (a mindfulness or a movement intervention) which were embedded in the survey. The mindfulness intervention was an 11 : 58 minute video of a seated guided meditation [53] by Jon Kabat Zinn. The movement intervention was an 11 : 48 minute video, of a vital energy balancing routine, named the Daily Energy Routine by Donna Eden [54]. Both were freely available on YouTube.

Following this, participants completed the PANAS-SF and the SVS again, while the ENJOY scale [55] was used to assessed enjoyment of the interventions. Two subscales, engagement and pleasure, were utilised in the current study. Each item is rated on a 7-point scale (1–7). Higher scores indicated higher engagement and pleasure. A composite ENJOY score was obtained by summing the averages of each subscale together. This was done to satisfy multicollinearity assumptions in the regression analyses. The survey concluded with an optional, open-ended question to capture participants’ qualitative experience of the interventions.

2.3 Data analysis

Data analysis was performed using SPSS 28 software and descriptive and inferential statistical methods. Three mixed ANOVAs compared average scores for positive and negative affect and vitality in the two interventions. A Bonferroni adjustment was made to account for the three tests, resulting in an alpha level of 0.017. Three regression analysis explored the relationship between the predictors (age, gender, frequency of practice, DASS-21 and ENJOY scores), and pre and post intervention affect and vitality scores. A power analysis was conducted using G * Power for sample size estimation for multiple regression, with an effect size = 0.2, power level = 0.95, α= 0.05 and 5 predictor variables. This resulted in a minimum recommended sample size of 105. After a significant social media recruitment effort, 102 people provided informed consent for research participation. However, upon cleaning the data, 40 participants were excluded prior to analysis for failing to complete the survey and/or interventions, thus the study was underpowered. Thematic analysis [56] was performed on the optional, open-ended survey question.

3 Results

3.1 Descriptive statistics

A total of 62 participants took part in this study, while participants were randomly and equally allocated to either condition, upon cleaning the data, the movement condition (n = 32) had a slightly higher number of participants than the mindfulness condition (n = 30). Most participants identified as female (n = 46, 74.2%) and those aged 35–44 years were the largest age group (n = 17, 27.4%). Over half of participants either never practiced (35.5%) or practiced a complementary health technique less than once a month (17.7%). Overall, the two groups were similar in composition. However, there were some differences between the mindfulness and movement groups. This was seen in the proportion who were aged between 25–34 years and those who practice complementary health technique 1–2 and 3–5 times per week (Table 1).

Table 1
Effects of mindfulness & movement interventions on affect and vitality

Variable MINDFULNESS MOVEMENT Full study sample

n % n % n %

Gender

Male 8 26.7 8 25.0 16 25.8

Female 22 73.3 24 75.0 46 74.2

Age Group

18–24 years 6 20.0 7 21.9 13 21.0

25–34 years 1 3.3 4 12.5 5 8.1

35–44 years 11 36.7 6 18.8 17 27.4

45–54 years 5 16.7 4 12.5 9 14.5

55–64 years 4 13.3 8 25.0 12 19.4

65+ years 3 10.0 3 9.4 6 9.7

How often do you practice a CAM wellbeing technique

Never 11 36.7 11 34.4 22 35.5

Less than once a month 5 16.7 6 18.8 11 17.7

1–3 times a month 4 13.3 4 12.5 8 12.9

1–2 times weekly 1 3.3 7 21.9 8 12.9

3–5 times weekly 5 16.7 1 3.1 6 9.7

Daily/almost daily 4 13.3 3 9.4 7 11.3

Variable	MINDFULNESS	MOVEMENT	Full study sample
Gender
Male	8	26.7	8	25.0	16	25.8
Female	22	73.3	24	75.0	46	74.2
Age Group
18–24 years	6	20.0	7	21.9	13	21.0
25–34 years	1	3.3	4	12.5	5	8.1
35–44 years	11	36.7	6	18.8	17	27.4
45–54 years	5	16.7	4	12.5	9	14.5
55–64 years	4	13.3	8	25.0	12	19.4
65+ years	3	10.0	3	9.4	6	9.7
How often do you practice a CAM wellbeing technique
Never	11	36.7	11	34.4	22	35.5
Less than once a month	5	16.7	6	18.8	11	17.7
1–3 times a month	4	13.3	4	12.5	8	12.9
1–2 times weekly	1	3.3	7	21.9	8	12.9
3–5 times weekly	5	16.7	1	3.1	6	9.7
Daily/almost daily	4	13.3	3	9.4	7	11.3

Note. N = 62 (MINDFULNESS n = 30, MOVEMENT n = 32).

3.2 Inferential statistics

The data approximated normality and both groups displayed similar levels of positive affect, negative affect and subjective vitality pre intervention. Despite lacking statistical significance at the Bonferroni adjusted alpha level of 0.017, post intervention positive affect increased in the movement intervention and decreased in the mindfulness intervention. Both groups reported statistically significant decreases in negative affect, with the greatest decrease reported in the mindfulness intervention. Subjective vitality had the greatest statistically significant post intervention improvement for both groups, with the greatest increases reported in the movement intervention (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1

Mean levels of pre and post intervention positive affect, negative affect and subjective vitality.

The interaction between time and group was not statistically significant for any of the measures. For Positive Affect, the interaction between time and group was not statistically significant (Wilks’ Lambda = 0.93, F (1, 60) = 4.59, p = 0.036, partial eta squared 0.07) (Fig. 1). The main effects for time (Wilks’ Lambda = 0.96, F (1, 60) = 2.42, p = 0.125, partial eta squared = 0.04), and group, (F (1, 60) = 3.22, p = 0.078, partial eta squared = 0.05) were not statistically significant.

For Negative Affect, there was a significant main effect for time (Pillai’s Trace = 0.22, F (1, 60) = 17.25, p < 0.001) partial eta squared = 0.22) with Negative Affect decreasing significantly post intervention (Fig. 1). There was a significant main effect for time (Wilk’s Lambda = 0.77, F (1, 60) = 17.74, p < 0.001, partial eta squared = 0.23) with Subjective Vitality increasing post intervention (Fig. 1).

Three standard multiple regressions were performed to determine how well post intervention changes in Positive Affect, Negative Affect and Subjective Vitality could be explained. Correlations between the predictor variables ranged from –0.19 to 0.40. The minimum Tolerance value was 0.68 and the maximum VIF value was 1.46, indicating the assumption of multicollinearity was not violated. Bivariate correlations for Positive Affect, Negative Affect and Subjective Vitality are reported in supplementary information. A Bonferroni adjustment was made to account for the three tests resulting in an alpha level of 0.017.

The Positive Affect model was statistically significant and explained 21.6% (14.6% Adjusted R Square) of variance in changes (F (5, 56) = 3.09, p = 0.016). ENJOY scores (β= 0.43) were significantly, moderately and positively associated with changes in positive affect. Participants with higher ENJOY scores had greater increases in positive affect.

The Negative Affect model was statistically significant and explained 35% (29.2% Adjusted R Square) of variance in changes (F (5, 56) = 6.02, p < 0.001). DASS-21 scores (β= –0.57) were significantly, strongly and negatively associated with reduction in negative affect. Higher DASS-21 scores were associated with greater reductions in negative affect.

The Subjective Vitality model was not statistically significant at the adjusted alpha level and explained 19.2% (12% Adjusted R Square) of variance in SV (F (5, 56) = 2.67, p = 0.031). Higher ENJOY scores were associated with greater increases in subjective vitality.

3.3 Qualitative results

The themes of positive experiences, negative experiences, self-efficacy, accessibility and belief were identified and highlighted differences, and similarities between the groups (Table 2). Eight participants reported positive experiences, which resulted in varying perceived benefits, following the mindfulness intervention compared to twelve in the movement intervention. Smaller numbers reported negative experiences, negatively impacting benefits, in the mindfulness (3) and movement interventions (2). Self-efficacy benefits were noted in both groups mindfulness (3) and movement (4), illustrating the self-management utility of the interventions. Accessibility illustrated a significant difference between the conditions, with mindfulness participants (3) noting challenges and movement participants (3) noting simplicity and ease of access. Belief illustrated differences, as no participants in the mindfulness intervention expressed doubt on the efficacy of the intervention, however, in the movement intervention, participants (3) expressed initial scepticism and uncertainty, and were surprised by subsequent perceived benefits.

Table 2
Themes & participant experiences

Theme Example quotes mindfulness intervention Example quotes movement intervention

Positive experiences “It really allowed me to slow down and take a break from stressful thoughts.” “beneficial to my mood.”

“Totally relaxed.” “I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day. I do feel in lighter spirits.”

“I really enjoyed it.” “I enjoyed the way she explained everything. She came across as kind and patient and that was quite gratifying.”

“Calming.” “It was enlighten and enjoyable.”

“I feel much lighter after meditating.” “Very therapeutic simple and good.”

“It reminded me of how important it is to just stop and be and the immense value of meditation.” “Simple movements, great benefits.”

“Made me feel hopeful and felt I had some say in how I feel and also control over my health and well-being.”

Negative experiences “Didn’t enjoy the facilitator’s voice at all so didn’t watch the whole video.” “Personally felt I did not get a whole lot out of it.”

“I found it too easy to get distracted and soon lost interest in what was being said - especially as there was no face to be watching.” “I do not think that the lady’s voice and enthusiasm suited me and allow myself to be more relaxed.”

“Good video but I did not enjoy the narrator’s voice and I think that put me off a bit.”

Self-efficacy “It really allowed me to slow down and take a break from stressful thoughts.” “Taking steps to manage a situation, whether they work or not, doing something positive is key to well-being I think.”

“It reminded me of how important it is to just stop and be and the immense value of meditation.” “Before starting the exercise I was very tired and working in bed, I had actually cancelled a meeting that was planned for later this evening. I felt sceptical about the video, but after doing the exercise I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day.”

“I am interested in other topics on this youtube channel and will look them up.” “Made me feel hopeful and felt I had some say in how I feel and also control over my health and well-being.”

Accessibility “Doing it with more regularly I feel I would be better able to block out what is going on around me.” “Very therapeutic simple and good.”

“I found it too easy to get distracted and soon lost interest in what was being said - especially as there was no face to be watching.” “Simple movements, great benefits.”

“It took a long time to settle into it.” “I enjoyed the tappings. I think they can be brought anywhere.”

Belief “I can see how this would make you feel better if you believed in it.”

“There were some techniques I felt silly doing, but it was actually those techniques which appeared to be the most beneficial to my mood.”

“I felt sceptical about the video, but after doing the exercise I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day. I am unsure if it was the physical moving and touching of the several points if it actually “released” energy or if it was just the positive words and smile on the woman’s face, but I do feel in lighter spirits.”

Theme	Example quotes mindfulness intervention	Example quotes movement intervention
Positive experiences	“It really allowed me to slow down and take a break from stressful thoughts.”	“beneficial to my mood.”
	“Totally relaxed.”	“I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day. I do feel in lighter spirits.”
	“I really enjoyed it.”	“I enjoyed the way she explained everything. She came across as kind and patient and that was quite gratifying.”
	“Calming.”	“It was enlighten and enjoyable.”
	“I feel much lighter after meditating.”	“Very therapeutic simple and good.”
	“It reminded me of how important it is to just stop and be and the immense value of meditation.”	“Simple movements, great benefits.”
		“Made me feel hopeful and felt I had some say in how I feel and also control over my health and well-being.”
Negative experiences	“Didn’t enjoy the facilitator’s voice at all so didn’t watch the whole video.”	“Personally felt I did not get a whole lot out of it.”
	“I found it too easy to get distracted and soon lost interest in what was being said - especially as there was no face to be watching.”	“I do not think that the lady’s voice and enthusiasm suited me and allow myself to be more relaxed.”
	“Good video but I did not enjoy the narrator’s voice and I think that put me off a bit.”
Self-efficacy	“It really allowed me to slow down and take a break from stressful thoughts.”	“Taking steps to manage a situation, whether they work or not, doing something positive is key to well-being I think.”
	“It reminded me of how important it is to just stop and be and the immense value of meditation.”	“Before starting the exercise I was very tired and working in bed, I had actually cancelled a meeting that was planned for later this evening. I felt sceptical about the video, but after doing the exercise I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day.”
	“I am interested in other topics on this youtube channel and will look them up.”	“Made me feel hopeful and felt I had some say in how I feel and also control over my health and well-being.”
Accessibility	“Doing it with more regularly I feel I would be better able to block out what is going on around me.”	“Very therapeutic simple and good.”
	“I found it too easy to get distracted and soon lost interest in what was being said - especially as there was no face to be watching.”	“Simple movements, great benefits.”
	“It took a long time to settle into it.”	“I enjoyed the tappings. I think they can be brought anywhere.”
Belief		“I can see how this would make you feel better if you believed in it.”
		“There were some techniques I felt silly doing, but it was actually those techniques which appeared to be the most beneficial to my mood.”
		“I felt sceptical about the video, but after doing the exercise I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day. I am unsure if it was the physical moving and touching of the several points if it actually “released” energy or if it was just the positive words and smile on the woman’s face, but I do feel in lighter spirits.”

4 Discussion

This study sought to address gaps in the literature, thus explored and compared the effects of a one time, brief, online mindfulness and movement intervention on affect and vitality. Furthermore, it explored differences between mindfulness and movement interventions, and individual differences on outcomes. Findings suggest that, while there is potential for such interventions to lead to short-term improvements in affect and vitality, there may be considerable individual variations in accessibility, preference, enjoyment, and outcomes.

While results suggest that both interventions increased subjective wellbeing, this was more clearly the case in the movement intervention. Interestingly, while negative affect decreased in the mindfulness intervention, positive affect also decreased suggesting benefits for wellbeing were less clear cut. Individual differences in enjoyment were predictive of changes in positive affect and vitality. General levels of distress, as measured by the DASS-21 were predictive of changes in negative affect. Contrary to previous wellbeing research [57], changes were not correlated with age, gender, or frequency of practice, suggesting the accessibility of these brief online interventions.

As conventional treatments struggle to improve positive affect [58, 59] the increases in positive affect in the movement intervention warrant further investigation despite lacking statistical significance at the Bonferroni adjusted level. While conventional treatments are effective at repairing negative affect [60] this movement intervention may effectively target and increase positive affect, resulting in improved outcomes [22, 61]. Furthermore, and potentially of significance to workplace wellbeing interventions, higher levels of general distress in participants allocated to the movement intervention did not inhibit increases in positive affect. Interventions which increase positive affect may provide immediate benefit to people experiencing general distress and may improve feelings of self-efficacy and wellbeing as evidenced by the theme of self-efficacy and positive experiences.

It is interesting to note that positive affect decreased in the mindfulness intervention. There are mixed results on the effect of mindfulness interventions on positive affect [62]. Mindfulness is underpinned by Buddhist philosophy, which promotes emotional stability [63]. This mechanism may explain the reduction in positive affect and may contribute to explaining high attrition rates in mindfulness interventions [64]. However, it is also possible that decreases in positive affect may be due to negative experiences with this specific intervention. Supporting this, several participants reported not completing the mindfulness intervention or found it difficult to engage with because they did not like the instructors’ voice or were too easily distracted. Research shows the importance of having trust in or liking the mindfulness instructor [65] and is an important factor when considering the reduction in positive affect in the mindfulness group. Conversely, in the movement intervention, fewer participants reported a lower level of dissatisfaction, stating “not getting anything” from the intervention. Therefore, the movement intervention may be a more accessible self-management technique.

Results may have implications for the increasing use of mindfulness interventions with clinical populations. Those with mental health conditions use CAM interventions more frequently and to a greater extent than the general population [66]. With the increasing use of CAM, particularly mindfulness, clinical practitioners may need to be better prepared to support people who have experienced strong emotions and adverse experiences, thus a sufficient level of support is a consideration when offering mindfulness in workplace settings. In cultures where mindfulness originated, experienced meditation teachers are readily available and accessible, however, this is lacking in western society. Measuring adverse events in mindfulness is understudied, and psychological research needs to improve its understanding and responses [67].

The mechanisms involved in movement interventions may be more effective at increasing positive affect and vitality compared to mindfulness. Given the gap in the knowledge on how to promote vitality at work [47] these findings have implications for employers. Vitality is strongly associated with high levels of positive affect and wellbeing [68]. Therefore, the relationship between positive affect and vitality may provide a mechanism which increases wellbeing. The theme positive experience illustrated differences between the mindfulness and movement intervention. The mindfulness intervention was perceived as relaxing and calming which may explain the observed reductions in stress, anxiety, or negative affect. In contrast, benefits of the movement intervention were described as restoring, refreshing, revitalising, enlightening, and being linked to improved productivity, encapsulated in this participant quotation, “Before starting the exercise I was very tired and working in bed, I had actually cancelled a meeting that was planned for later this evening. I felt sceptical about the video, but after doing the exercise I felt restored and refreshed. I feel as if my energy has been revitalized and I can now have a more productive day”. Furthermore, cognitive benefits were highlighted in the mindfulness intervention, whereas affective and therapeutic benefits were noted in the movement intervention.

The Eastern construct of energy, chi, or prana may be another mechanism which increases positive affect and vitality in the context of movement interventions. This construct requires further research for Western understanding and application, and for integration of cross-cultural approaches in the area of health and wellbeing [69]. This point is demonstrated by the theme belief. Implicit belief or acceptance of the mindfulness intervention was indicated though lack of questioning of its efficacy and validity by participants. Conversely, participants in the movement group reported feeling sceptical and silly, and mentioned the need for belief in the intervention to acquire benefits. Despite this scepticism and feeling the need for epistemological validation, participants noted improved mood and energy levels, indicating that expectations did not inhibit positive experiences and perceived benefits in the movement intervention. Expectation effects and acceptability of an intervention can be important factors in outcomes and attrition rates [70], however, in the movement intervention they did not necessarily influence the outcome. Thus, initial lack of cultural acceptability of the movement intervention may not be a significant barrier to participation and potential benefits.

Reductions in negative affect in both interventions suggest they may be beneficial for self-management and improving wellbeing. However, greater reductions in negative affect were found in the mindfulness intervention, perhaps indicating the efficacy of mindfulness mechanisms in reducing negative affect compared to movement interventions. This finding may also support previous evidence which suggests that mindfulness interventions are most effective for those with two or more depressive episodes [71]. This position is supported by the analyses in the secondary research question which found that individuals with higher levels of distress, as measured by the DASS-21, were more likely to report a greater reduction in negative affect. Thus, mindfulness interventions potentially have greater benefits for people with higher levels of negative affect.

The relationship between higher rates of enjoyment and improvements in positive affect and vitality across both interventions demonstrates the importance of individual preference in treatment adherence and outcomes [72]. This was also reflected in the theme of accessibility. The movement intervention was noted as easily accessible, consisting of simple movements which could be brought anywhere and had great benefits. In contrast, access challenges were noted in the mindfulness intervention, including time it took to settle into the practice, loss of interest, distractions, and the need for a suitable environment, which is a significant consideration for workplace interventions. As mindfulness interventions aim to reduce engagement with external stimuli, sensory experiences may become more salient and have greater potential to induce negative experiences. Dislike of instructor attributes, in particular the voice, negatively impacted experience of the interventions and perceived benefits, particularly in the mindfulness intervention. Therefore, individual preferences are key considerations in provision of wellbeing interventions and demonstrate that one size does not fit all. Developing well researched, online, self-paced CAM techniques may improve population outcomes and provide accessible, effective, and sustainable workplace wellbeing interventions suitable for post COVID blended working environments.

4.1 Limitations

As this is an under researched area, the current research is exploratory, and findings are preliminary. Thus, caution is necessary in drawing conclusions and interpreting findings.

Additionally, as convenience sampling was utilised, participants self-selected and were predominantly female, therefore results may not be generalisable. However, gender was not predictive of outcomes. Utilising random sampling and providing participant information sessions may increase participant engagement and retention and improve the generalisability of future research.

Participant expectation effects were not controlled for. However, the theme of belief suggests that expectation effects may not have been influential. Self-report measures can be prone to social desirability bias, however the collection of anonymized data may have mitigated such bias. While the current study provided ecological validity, it did not control for environmental influences. Duration of effects were not measured. A methodology limitation of the study may have been, the presentation of the interventions, with a person to watch and follow in the movement intervention and the mindfulness intervention presenting a static screen and audio instructions. Interestingly, while this study was underpowered the strength of the statistically significant findings is noteworthy and opens up promising avenues for future research.

5 Conclusion

Brief online mindfulness and movement interventions may provide accessible, affordable, and sustainable self-management interventions for improving subjective wellbeing. Mindfulness and movement interventions may have different effects with clinical implications. Further research could provide understanding of the mechanisms involved, resulting in targeted and effective use.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval for this study was granted from the Department of Psychology Ethics Committee at Maynooth University on 19th October 2021 (no identifier number available). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964.

Informed consent

Participation was voluntary and no incentives were provided. The survey, including study information and informed consent form (supplementary appendix), was accessible on any electronic device with internet connection and only those who provided informed consent could participate.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Róisín Devoy is a teacher and practitioner of both mindfulness and movement interventions.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank everyone who participated in and supported the study, including Donna, Noel, Fionn, Ciara, Angela, Alexie, Anne, Hazel, David, Cormac.

Funding

No funding was received for this work.

The supplementary appendix is available in the electronic version of this article:.

References

World Health Organization. Depression and other common mental disorders: Global health estimates. Whoint. 2017.https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/254610(Accessed23/10/2021)

Pfeffer

, Williams

. Mental health in the workplace: The coming revolution. McKinsey Quarterly. 2020;8:1-9.https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/ourinsights/mental-health-in-the-workplace-the-comingrevolution(Accessed 23/10/2021)

Vyas-Doorgapersad

. A Critical Review of Employee Health, Wellbeing Programs, and Organizational Success: Navigating Post-COVID-19 Sustainable Development. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science(2147-4478). 2023;12(6):91–100.

Diener

, Lucas

, Oishi

. Advances and Open Questions in the Science of Subjective Well-Being. Collabra: Psychology. 2018;4(1):15.https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.115

Grant

, McGhee

Hedonic versus (true) eudaimonic well-being in organizations. The Palgrave handbook of workplace well-being. 2021:925–43.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30025-837.

Warr

, Nielsen

. Wellbeing andwork performance. Handbook of well-being. 2018 Feb. 1:1–22.

Kleine

, Rudolph

, Zacher

. Thriving at work: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2019;40(9–10):973.https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2375.

Potter

, Drewelies

, Wagner

, Duezel

, Brose

, Demuth

, Steinhagen-Thiessen

, Lindenberger

, Wagner

, Gerstorf

. Trajectories of multiple subjective well-being facets across old age: The role of health and personality. Psychology and Aging. 2020;35(6):894.https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000459.

der Kinderen

, Khapova

Positive psychological well-being at work: The role of eudaimonia. The Palgrave handbook of workplace well-being.2020:1–28.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02470-379-1.

10.

Diener

, Chan

. Happy People Live Longer: Subjective Well-Being Contributes to Health and Longevity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being. 2011;3(1):1–43.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-0854.2010.01045.x.

11.

Ngamaba

, Panagioti

, Armitage

. How strongly related are health status and subjective well-being? Systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Public Health. 2017;27(5):879–85.https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckx081.

12.

Bryson

, Forth

, Stokes

. Does employees’ subjective well-being affect workplace performance?Human Relations. 2017;70(8):1017–37. doi:10.1177/0018726717693073.

13.

Fannin , Hooley

, Reeves

, Marçal

C. J.

, Treglown

, Woerner

, Graeff-Buhl-Nielsen

,(2023). Occupational burnout and public stigma associated with employee mental well-being: A multi-industry, cross-sectional study during COVID-19. Work, (Preprint), 1-11https://doi10.3233/WOR-220507.

14.

Graeff-Buhl-Nielsen

, Garcia-Garzon

, Benzerga

, Folke

, Ruggeri

. Global mental health: An improved measure of well-being in multiple languages. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):209. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01375-3.

15.

, Park

, Hyun

. Impacts of the covid-19 pandemic on employees’ work stress, well-being, mental health, organizational citizenship behavior, and employee-customer identification. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management. 2021;30(5):1–20https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2021.1867283

16.

Berry

, Mirabito

A.M.

, Baun

W.B.

, 2020. What’s the hard return on employee wellness programs? (pp. 2012- 2068). SSRN.

17.

Brosnan

, Nauphal

, Tompson

. Acceptability and feasibility of the online delivery of hatha yoga: A systematic review of the literature. Complementary Therapies in Medicine. 2021;60:102742.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2021.

18.

Lake

Complementary and alternative medicine and mental health. Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology. 2022;https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-91497-0.00009-6.

19.

Baminiwatta

, Solangaarachchi

. Trends and Developments in Mindfulness Research over 55 Years: A Bibliometric Analysis of Publications Indexed in Web of Science. Mindfulness. 2021;12(9):2099–116. doi:10.1007/s12671-021-01681-x.

20.

Matos

, Machado

, Monteiro

, Greten

. Understanding traditional Chinese medicine therapeutics: An overview of the basics and clinical applications. InHealthcare 2021 Mar 1 (Vol. 9, No. 3, p. 257). MDPI.https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9030257.

21.

Nilkantham

. Role of yoga in managing the consequences of work stress-a review. Health Promotion International. 2023;38(3):daac038https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daac038.

22.

Sauer-Zavala

, Walsh

, Eisenlohr-Moul

, Lykins

ELB

. Comparing Mindfulness-Based Intervention Strategies: Differential Effects of Sitting Meditation, Body Scan, and Mindful Yoga. Mindfulness. 2013;4(4):383–8. doi:10.1007/s12671-012-0139-9.

23.

Pascoe

, Thompson

, Ski

. Yoga, mindfulness-based stress reduction and stress-related physiological measures: A meta-analysis. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2017;86:152–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.08.008.

24.

Hilton

, Marshall

, Motala

, Taylor

, Miake-Lye

, Baxi

, et al. Mindfulness meditation for workplace wellness: An evidence map. Rice VJ, editor. Work. 2019;63(2):205–18. doi:10.3233/WOR-192922.

25.

Shahbaz

, Parker

. Workplace mindfulness: Fundamental issues for research and practice. Labour & Industry: A journal of the social and economic relations of work. 2021Apr 3;31(2):172–9.].https://doi.org/10.1080/10301763.2021.1878572.

26.

Davies

. Happiness industry –how the government and big business sold us well-being. Verso Books; 2015.

27.

Núñez-Sánchez

, Gómez-Chacón

, Jambrino-Maldonado

, García-Fernández

. Corporate well-being programme in COVID-19 times. The Mahou San Miguel case study. Sustainability.]. 2021;13(11):6189.].https://doi.10.3390/su13116189.

28.

Shapiro

, Oman

, Thoresen

, Plante

, Flinders

. Cultivating mindfulness: Effects on well-being. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2008;64(7):840–62. doi:10.1002/jcl20491.

29.

Cramer

, Haller

, Dobos

, Lauche

. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Estimating the Expected Dropout Rates in Randomized Controlled Trials on Yoga Interventions. Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2016;2016:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5859729.

30.

Laurie

, Blandford

Making time for mindfulness. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2016;96:38–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.02.010.

31.

Spadola

, Rottapel

, Khandpur

, Kontos

, Bertisch

, Johnson

, et al. Enhancing yoga participation: A qualitative investigation of barriers and facilitators to yoga among predominantly racial/ethnic minority, low-income adults. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice. 2017;29:97–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2017.09.001.

32.

Mak

, Chio

, Chan

, Lui

, Wu

. The Efficacy of -Based Mindfulness Training and Cognitive-Behavioral Training With Telephone Support in the Enhancement of Mental Health Among College Students and Young Working Adults: Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Medical Research. 2017;19(3):e84https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6737.

33.

Nissen

, O’Connor

, Kaldo

, Højris

, Borre

, Zachariae

, et al. -delivered mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for anxiety and depression in cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial. Psycho-Oncology. 2019;29(1):68–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5237.

34.

Wolever

, Bobinet

, McCabe

, Mackenzie

, Fekete

, Kusnick

, et al. Effective and viable mind-body stress reduction in the workplace: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 2012;17(2):246–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027278.

35.

Knoerl

, Giobbie-Hurder

, Berfield

, Berry

, Meyerhardt

, Wright

, et al. Yoga for chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy pain: A pilot, randomized controlled trial. Journal of Cancer Survivorshi. 2021;16(4):882–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-021-01081-z

36.

Schumer

, Lindsay

, Creswell

. Brief mindfulness training for negative affectivity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2018;86(7):569–83. doi:10.1037/ccp0000324.

37.

Howarth

, Smith

, Perkins-Porras

, Ussher

. Effects of brief mindfulness-based interventions on health-related outcomes: A systematic review. Mindfulness. 2019;10(10):1957–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01163-1.

38.

Carmody

, Baer

. Relationships between mindfulness practice and levels of mindfulness, medical and psychological symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 2008;31(1):23–33. doi:10.1007/s10865-007-9130-7.

39.

Jain

, Shapiro

, Swanick

, Roesch

, Mills

, Bell

, et al. A randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation versus relaxation training: Effects on distress, positive states of mind, rumination, and distraction. Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 2007;33(1):11–21. doi:10.1207/s15324796abm3301_2.

40.

Howarth

, Perkins-Porras

, Copland

, Ussher

. Views on a brief mindfulness intervention among patients with long-term illness. BMC Psychology. 2016;4(1):56. doi.10.1186/s40359-016-0163-y.

41.

Demarzo

, Montero-Marin

, Puebla-Guedea

, Navarro-Gil

, Herrera-Mercadal

, Moreno-González

, et al. Efficacy of 8- and 4-Session Mindfulness-Based Interventions in a Non-clinical Population: A Controlled Study. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:1343https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01343.

42.

Akten

, Yıldırım

, Dığın

. Examining the burnout levels of healthcare employees and related factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study. Work. 2023;76(2):461–71. DOI:10.3233/WOR-220562.

43.

Dineen-Griffin

, Garcia-Cardenas

, Williams

, Benrimoj

. Helping patients help themselves: A systematic review of self-management support strategies in primary health care practice. PLOS ONE. 2019;14(8):e0220116https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220116.

44.

Huppert

, So

TTC

. Flourishing Across Europe: Application of a New Conceptual Framework for Defining Well-Being. Social Indicators Research. 2013;110(3):837–61. doi: 10.1007/s11205-011-9966-7.

45.

Diener

, Thapa

, Tay

. Positive emotions at work. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. 2020;7:451–77. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevorgpsych-012119-044908.

46.

Ryan

, Frederick

. On Energy, Personality, and Health: Subjective Vitality as a Dynamic Reflection of Well-Being. Journal of Personality. 1997;65(3):529–65. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00326.x.

47.

van Scheppingen

, de Vroome

, Ten Have

, Zwetsloot

, Wiezer

, van Mechelen

. Vitality at work and its associations with lifestyle, self-determination, organizational culture, and with employees’ performance and sustainable employability. Work. 2015;52(1):45–55. doi:10.3233/WOR-141947.

48.

Kercher

. Assessing Subjective Well-Being in the Old-Old. Research on Aging. 1992;14(2):131–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027592142001.

49.

Mackinnon

, Jorm

, Christensen

, Korten

, Jacomb

, Rodgers

. A short form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule: Evaluation of factorial validity and invariance across demographic variables in a community sample. Personality and Individual Differences. 1999;27(3):405–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00251-7.

50.

Lovibond

, Lovibond

The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the depression anxiety stress scales (DASS) with the beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 1995;33(3):335–43. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-u.

51.

Beaufort Ilse

, De Weert-Van Oene Gerdien

, Buwalda Victor

, de Leeuw Rob

. Goudriaan Anna

. The Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) as a Screener for Depression in Substance Use Disorder Inpatients: A Pilot Study. European Addiction Research. 2017;23(5):260–8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000485182.

52.

Moore

, Dowdy

, Furlong

. Using the Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales–21 With US. Adolescents: An Alternate Models Analysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 2016;35(6):581–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282916651537.

53.

Jon Kabat-Zinn , Guided Mindfulness Meditation, Series 1, Sitting Meditation. www.youtube.com. Available from:https://youtu.be/I9Z4t9ZiUzM (Accessed 23/10/2021)

54.

Donna Eden’s Daily Energy Routine [OFFICIAL VERSION].https://www.youtube.com.Available from: https://youtu.be/Di5Ua44iuXc(Accessed 23/10/2021)

55.

Davidson

,(2018). A Multi-dimensional model of enjoyment: Development and validation of an enjoyment scale (ENJOY). Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.

56.

Braun

, Clarke

. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006;3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

57.

Keyes

CLM

, Shmotkin

, Ryff

. Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82(6):1007–22. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.1007.

58.

Brown

. Temporal course and structural relationships among dimensions of temperament and DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorder constructs. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 2007;116(2):313–28. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.116.2.313.

59.

Taylor

, Lyubomirsky

, Stein

. Upregulating the positive affect system in anxiety and depression: Outcomes of a positive activity intervention. Depression and Anxiety. 2017;34(3):267–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.22593.

60.

Dunn

, German

, Khazanov

, Xu

, Hollon

, DeRubeis

. Changes in Positive and Negative Affect During Pharmacological Treatment and Cognitive Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder: A Secondary Analysis of Two Randomized Controlled Trials. Clinical Psychological Science. 2019;8(1):36–51. https/doi.org/10.1177/2167702619863427.

61.

Hunt

, Al-Braiki

, Dailey

, Russell

, Simon

. Mindfulness Training, Yoga, or Both? Dismantling the Active Components of a Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction Intervention. Mindfulness. 2017;9(2):512–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0793-z.

62.

Tang

, Braver

. Towards an Individual Differences Perspective in Mindfulness Training Research: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020;11:818https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00818.

63.

Rowland

, Wenzel

, Kubiak

. A mind full of happiness: How mindfulness shapes affect dynamics in daily life. Emotion. 2020;20(3):436https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000562.

64.

Lam

, Kirvin-Quamme

, Goldberg

. Overall and Differential Attrition in Mindfulness-Based Interventions: A Meta-Analysis. Mindfulness. 2676;13(11):2676–90. doi:10.1007/s12671-022-01970-z.

65.

Rice

, Schroeder

. In-Person and Virtual World Mindfulness Training: Trust, Satisfaction, and Learning. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2021;24(8):526–35. doi:10.1089/cyber.2019.0590.

66.

de Jonge

, Wardenaar

, Hoenders

, Evans-Lacko

, Kovess-Masfety

, Aguilar-Gaxiola

, et al.Complementary and alternative medicine contacts by persons with mental disorders in 25 countries: Results from the World Mental Health Surveys. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences. 2017;27(6):552–67. doi: 10.1017/S2045796017000774.

67.

Farias

, Maraldi

, Wallenkampf

, Lucchetti

. Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation-based therapies: A systematic review. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2020;142(5):374–93. doi:10.1111/acps.13225.

68.

Wood

, Magnello

, Jewell

. Measuring Vitality. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 1990;83(8):486–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107689008300803

69.

Wang

, Wang

, Li

, Shi

, Wang

. The comparison of the wisdom view in Chinese and Western cultures. Current Psychology. 2022;41:8032–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01226-w

70.

Sekhon

, Cartwright

, Francis

. Acceptability of healthcare interventions: An overview of reviews and development of a theoretical framework. BMC Health Services Research. 2017;17(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2031-8.

71.

Strauss

, Cavanagh

, Oliver

, Pettman

. Mindfulness-Based Interventions for People Diagnosed with a Current Episode of an Anxiety or Depressive Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(4):e96110. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096110.

72.

Ward

, Haig

, McDonald

. Translating science into practice in clinical psychology: A reformulation of the evidence-based practice inquiry model. Theory & Psychology. 2022;32(3):401–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543211059816