Mindfulness

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01167-x

ORIGINAL PAPER

What Makes Mindfulness-Based Interventions Effective? An

Examination of Common Components
Alexander Kropp 1,2 & Peter Sedlmeier 1

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
Objectives Mindfulness-based approaches to meditation usually rely on not one but several specific techniques or elements, but
what elements are responsible for which of the commonly found positive effects is not yet known. To help answer this question,
we compared the effects of three different meditation techniques that are commonly used in mindfulness-based approaches.
Methods Fifty-six students with no prior meditation experience participated in a breathing, body scan, or loving-kindness
meditation condition. Participants followed meditation instructions that they were given on audio files, for daily practice and
weekly meetings over a period of 6 weeks. Dependent variables were mindfulness, concentration, self-compassion, emotional
regulation and experience, and life satisfaction.
Results The body scan meditation condition reported greater effects on almost all dependent variables than those in the breathing
meditation condition with effect sizes from β = .16 to .61. The group showed the highest increase in the mindfulness dimension
acceptance but not presence. Loving-kindness meditation showed higher effect sizes in concentration than the breathing med-
itation group.
Conclusions Specific meditation techniques may have effects other than expected on psychological variables. Considering the
limitations of this study, further research is needed to assess the specific effects of single mindfulness techniques.

Keywords Mindfulness . Breathing meditation . Mindfulness-based stress reduction . Body scan . Loving kindness meditation

There is an overwhelming amount of research suggesting that
mindfulness-based approaches to meditation yield generally
positive effects on a wide variety of psychological variables
(Eberth and Sedlmeier 2012; Grossman et al. 2004; Khoury
et al. 2013; Sedlmeier et al. 2018; Shapiro and Carlson 2009).
For instance, completing an 8-week mindfulness-based stress
reduction (MBSR) program has been shown to have positive
effects on self-compassion (treating oneself with
understanding and concern; Birnie et al. 2010), emotional re-
activity and regulation (Goldin and Gross 2010; Goldin et al.
2012), and life satisfaction (Mackenzie et al. 2006). Several
approaches to mindfulness meditation have also been shown
to raise self-compassion and well-being (Esser 2012; Krygier
* Alexander Kropp
1
Department of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology,
09107 Chemnitz, Germany
2
Potsdam, Germany
et al. 2013; Kuyken et al. 2010). These effects are thought to
be mediated by an increase in mindfulness (Carmody and
Baer 2008; Kabat-Zinn 2013). However, there is considerable
debate about what mindfulness is (e.g., Van Dam et al. 2017),
and it is still far from clear what exactly causes these positive
effects as most mindfulness interventions consist of several
basic meditation techniques, such as breathing meditation,
body scan, and yoga exercises (Kabat-Zinn 2013; Segal
et al. 2012). Moreover, Van Dam et al. (2017) suggested that
a considerable amount of evidence supporting positive effects
of mindfulness, is based on studies that suffer from several
problems, like poor methodology and a lack of comparability
of methods (viz., definition of mindfulness, sort of instruc-
tions, concept of mindfulness measured, self-reported vs. ac-
tual mindfulness). In one study, when compared to an active
control group, meditation-related effects have even been
shown to be nullified (Noone and Hogan 2018). To address
these problems, Van Dam et al. (2017) proposed a standardi-
zation of methods used, a detailed description of the approach
taken and a careful interpretation of the results in light of the
limitations of each study.

There is increasing evidence suggesting that particular
meditation techniques may differ with respect to the strength
of their effects on different outcome measures. Distinguishing
between focused-attention (directing and sustaining attention
on a selected object) and open-monitoring (non-reactive
awareness of perceived stimuli) forms of meditation showed
differing effects on creativity (Colzato et al. 2012), pain per-
ception (Perlman et al. 2010) and attention (Ainsworth et al.
2013; Lutz et al. 2008).
Also, Carmody and Baer (2008) reported that specific com-
ponents of MBSR programs differ in their contribution to
mindfulness. They found that even when practiced less fre-
quently, mindful yoga produced a higher increase in mindful-
ness than other techniques. At the same time, informal practice
(doing routine activities mindfully) did not have any signifi-
cant effects on psychological variables. Therefore it is essen-
tial to isolate key components of mindfulness interventions to
find out more about their individual contributions to the re-
ported effects (Shapiro and Walsh 2003; Tang and Posner
2012). To date, only a few studies have investigated the spe-
cific effects of isolated mindfulness techniques. Sauer-Zavala
et al. (2013) showed that self-compassion could be improved
significantly with sitting meditation and yoga but not the body
scan exercise, all of which are part of a regular MBSR
program. At the same time, the body scan was able to stop
rumination more effectively than other components. Different
elements of the MBSR program may also have differential
influences on the immune system. Gallegos et al. (2013)
found that while mindful yoga and sitting meditation (e.g.,
watching the breath) promoted an increase in immune-
relevant parameters, the body scan technique caused a de-
crease. In another study, Hunt et al. (2017) attempted to dis-
mantle the relative contributions of mindfulness training and
meditation alone (no movement), yoga alone (no explicit
mindfulness), and their combination to stress reduction.
Their results indicate that yoga alone might be comparable
to the combined intervention on several stress-related outcome
measures. Moreover, a recent meta-analysis showed that dif-
ferent Buddhist approaches that are all termed Bmindfulness
meditation^ in the literature may yield quite diverse effects
(Sedlmeier et al. 2018). These findings suggest that different
mindfulness meditation techniques may not all be equally ef-
fective and moreover, may address different aspects of the
body and mind. To compare different techniques, apart from
measuring mindfulness, the most suitable measures might be
ones that are commonly used in meditation research, which
focus on the following areas: concentration and attentional
performance, self-compassion, emotional experience and reg-
ulation, and life satisfaction.
Being able to focus attention on a chosen object or point is
an important precondition for mindfulness (Gunaratana 1993).
However, voluntary attention cannot be sustained indefinitely.
In tasks requiring vigilance, attentional effort over time leads
Mindfulness
to a decline in performance, a process known as the vigilance
decrement (Grier et al. 2003). Vigilance during sustained vol-
untary attention can be improved by practicing breathing med-
itation (MacLean et al. 2010). This technique focuses the at-
tention on the sensations associated with the breath in an ob-
serving manner (Kabat-Zinn 2013). Intensive training de-
creases the resource demands necessary for a task and
sharpens perception within the radius of attention. Three types
of attentional regulation are practiced by sustaining the focus
on an object such as the breath: (1) the ability to monitor the
stimulus without destabilizing the intended focus, (2) the abil-
ity to dissociate from a perceived distraction, and (3) the abil-
ity to redirect attention to the chosen object (Lutz et al. 2008).
This improvement has been found to generalize to enhanced
perception in visual discrimination tasks (MacLean et al.
2010). Attention regulation also plays an in important role in
Vipassana meditation of the Goenka tradition, where exten-
sive observation of breath is applied to develop concentration
as a basic skill for further meditation techniques (Michalon
2001).
Self-compassion, another often-investigated area in medi-
tation research, consists of three essential elements: (1)
treating oneself kindly and without harsh judgment, (2) rec-
ognizing failures as part of human experience, and (3) main-
taining mindful awareness of painful thoughts and feelings
rather than suppressing them (Neff 2003a). Research has
shown substantial correlations between high levels of self-
compassion and several beneficial markers for psychological
health such as emotion-focused coping strategies (Neff et al.
2005), life satisfaction (Neff 2003b), high social connected-
ness, low self-criticism, rumination, and anxiety (Neff et al.
2007). Self-compassion is closely related to mindfulness
(Birnie et al. 2010). Scores on the Five Facet Mindfulness
Questionnaire correlated positively with the Self-
Compassion Scale (Hollis-Walker and Colosimo 2011).
There exist, however, different theories on how these two
interact (Raab 2014; Van Dam et al. 2011). Neff (2003a)
saw mindfulness as an important precondition for self-
compassion because the former enables a clear and non-
judgmental perception of arising emotions. Self-compassion
may also function as a mediator between mindfulness and
mental health (Hollis-Walker and Colosimo 2011) or even
be the element responsible for the success of mindfulness
interventions (Kuyken et al. 2010; Van Dam et al. 2011).
Given the various possible relationships between mindfulness
and self-compassion, two types of development could be ex-
pected in the development of the latter. Self-compassion
should be interrelated with mindfulness: a meditation tech-
nique that increases mindfulness (e.g., the body scan) should
also produce an increase in self-compassion. However, self-
compassion may also be enhanced by directly evoking an
inner feeling of compassion for the self and others (e.g.,
loving-kindness meditation; Weibel 2007).
Mindfulness
The effects on emotional experience and regulation are
often examined in meditation research. Dysfunctional strate-
gies for dealing with emotions may increase the risk of mental
and physical health problems (Gross 2002; Salovey et al.
2000). Avoidance of emotions has been found to correlate
with higher levels of anxiety and distress (Feldner et al.
2003). While an overidentification with negative emotions
may lead to rumination, worries, obsessions, recurrent crav-
ings, compulsive behavior, and immune dysregulation
(Kiecolt-Glaser et al. 2002), an over-engagement in positive
emotions may be linked to an underestimation of potential
threats and adoption of inappropriate coping strategies
(Pressman and Cohen 2005). The ability to regulate emotions
is therefore an essential feature of mental health (Gross and
Muñoz 1995). Most mindfulness interventions teach an
observe-and-accept approach in dealing with emotions and
may hence promote more adaptive ways of responding to
them: People become aware of their emotions, learn to differ-
entiate between several emotional states, and reflect on emo-
tional responses (Goldin and Gross 2010). The underlying
mechanisms of how mindfulness practice strengthens emo-
tional regulation are still being discussed (Hill and
Updegraff 2012). Enhanced mindfulness is associated with
less emotional avoidance, thought suppression, rumination,
worry, overgeneralization, better clarity of feelings and better
perceived ability to repair one’s mood and cognitive flexibil-
ity. It may therefore represent emotional balance (Hayes and
Feldman 2004). If mindfulness is the factor responsible for
promoting healthy emotional regulation, one would expect
the body scan, an element commonly used for improving
mindfulness, to produce the greatest improvements in dealing
with emotions. However, even participants of a focused
breathing group showed a more adaptive response to negative
slides than a control group (Arch and Craske 2006). Perhaps,
it could be self-compassion that mediates positive changes in
dealing with emotions. By perceiving one’s own experience
from the outside in order to extend compassion to the self, a
Bmental space^ might be created, preventing overidentifica-
tion with one’s emotions (Scheff 1981). Furthermore, self-
compassion requires some amount of facing one’s own emo-
tions in order to accept and establish compassion for the ex-
perience, preventing avoidance (Neff 2003a). Self-
compassion has also been found to mediate the effects of child
maltreatment on later emotional regulation difficulties
(Vettese et al. 2011).
Life satisfaction can be considered another important out-
come of meditation. It is described as the cognitive-evaluative
part of well-being (Pavot and Diener 1993) and is measured as
the assessment of life by certain criteria. Mindfulness inter-
ventions have been shown to improve life satisfaction
(Mackenzie et al. 2006) as well as well-being (Brown and
Ryan 2003; Krygier et al. 2013). Thus, mindfulness seems
to play an important role in improving life satisfaction.
There are several presumptions as to how mindfulness may
enhance life-satisfaction. Bajaj and Pande (2016) suggested
that mindfulness aids life satisfaction by developing resil-
ience, a personal trait that helps individuals in dealing with
and adjusting to adversities and traumatic events (see also
Connor and Davidson 2003). Mindful individuals will engage
less in rumination and habitual worrying (Shapiro et al. 2007)
and may therefore free up resources for a solution-focused
perspective. This may lead to improved positive evaluation
of their lives. Wang and Kong (2014) argue that mindfulness
may increase an individual’s ability to recognize the meaning
and relationship of emotions, managing them as well as using
them for better problem-solving and heightened life satisfac-
tion. Similarly, Kong et al. (2014) discussed that mindfulness
may encourage a positive interaction with one’s feelings,
thoughts, and situations. This may lead to more beneficial
self-evaluations and eventually to higher levels of life satis-
faction. Also, self-compassion has been shown to have a pos-
itive impact on life satisfaction (Neff 2003b). Practicing
loving-kindness meditation may lead to higher life satisfaction
by establishing positive emotions (Fredrickson et al. 2008).
The goal of the present study was to investigate whether
breathing meditation, body scan, and loving-kindness medita-
tion have different impacts on psychological measures that are
common in meditation research. We looked for changes in
concentration, self-compassion, emotional experience and
regulation, life satisfaction, and mindfulness, understood in
the usual way as a trait (for a different perspective, see Lutz
et al. 2015). Concerning the assessment of the latter, we
regarded mindfulness as composed of two components, as
proposed by Bishop et al. (2004). We expected the body scan,
being a main component in several mindfulness-based ap-
proaches for raising mindfulness (e.g., MBSR, Vipassana by
S.N. Goenka), to show the clearest and most profound in-
crease in mindful presence and acceptance. The expected in-
creased levels of mindfulness in the body scan group should in
turn lead to higher gains in positive emotional interaction as
well as life-satisfaction than the other two forms of meditation.
We expected that the breathing meditation should generate the
highest improvement in the visual discrimination task. And
finally, we hypothesized that the loving-kindness meditation
should affect self-compassion most profoundly.
Method
Participants
Potential student participants of the Chemnitz University of
Technology and the University of Leipzig replied to the email
invitation and were invited to attend an informational meeting.
Here, they were informed about the procedures and the con-
ditions of participation (sufficient language skills, absence of

any diagnosed psychological disorder, having no previous
meditation experience whatsoever, time and motivation for
daily meditation practice). A total of 147 students declared
interest in participating and anonymously completed several
questionnaires and tests examining their baseline level of
mindfulness, concentration, self-compassion, how they dealt
with emotions, and life satisfaction (pretesting; Table 1). Of
the 147 participants who had participated in the initial meeting
and who had been randomized into three groups of about 50
each, only 107 showed up for the first weekly meeting. This
resulted in an uneven distribution across conditions: breathing
meditation, n = 33, body scan, n = 32 and loving-kindness,
n = 42. Over the 6-week program, there was an additional
attrition of 51 (47.7%) participants, leaving 89 participants
by week 2, 77 by week 3, 63 by week 4, and 56 in week 5
and 6. Attrition rates were roughly comparable (45.5% in the
breathing meditation condition, 56.3% in the body scan con-
dition, and 42.9% in the loving-kindness condition). Dropouts
did not differ from accomplished participants with respect to
gender (F(1,105) = 1.06, p = .31) or age (F(1,105) = .52,
p = .47). Reasons for dropping out, that could be solicited,
included conflicting private issues or differing expectations
about the program.
Fifty-six participants (70% female, 30% male) completed
the 6-week program, resulting in a final distribution of 18
participants (32%; 5 male, 13 female) in the breathing group,
14 participants (25%; 6 male, 8 female) in the body scan
group, and 24 participants (43%, 6 male, 18 female) in the
loving-kindness meditation group. Mean age was 24.02 years
(SD = 4.52; range: 18–39 years).
Procedure
Informed consent was obtained from all individual partici-
pants included in the study. They were randomly assigned to
one of the three conditions by blindly drawing numbers.
Following the meeting, participants received a first non-
group specific meditation audio file with basic meditation in-
structions (e.g., sitting posture, quiet environment, and dealing
with distractions) via email. Meditation was expected to be
practiced at a similar time every day. Recorded meditation
instructions were provided for free by a Buddhist center
Table 1 Experimental design
Condition Pre-testing
Breathing meditation FMI FAIR-2 SCS SEE SWLS
Body scan
Loving-kindness meditation
FAIR-2, Frankfurt Attention Inventory-2; FMI, Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (short version); SCS, Self-Compassion Scale; SEE, Scales for
Experiencing Emotions; SWLS, Satisfaction with Life Scale
Mindfulness
(retrieved from https://soundcloud.com/sanghawuerzburg,
06.09.2017).
Weekly group-related meetings were set up to clarify in-
structions, discuss problems during meditation with an expe-
rienced teacher (the first author) and practice the respective
meditation technique under supervision. Qualification of the
instructor included the completion of a Vipassana course by
S.N. Goenka and 5 years of meditation practice. The instructor
was not blinded to the conditions, due to circumstances.
Meetings were kept standardized in time (1 h/group) and pro-
cedure (first, answering questions about past weeks medita-
tions; second, practicing the respective meditation technique
in the group setting; third, going through the instructions for
the following week), for all three conditions. After each meet-
ing, participants received their group-specific meditation au-
dio instruction file via email for the following week of home
practice. It was made sure that instructions were standardized
and from the same speaker in each condition. Every week
participants were given a follow-up version of their meditation
practice that extended practice time and reduced instructions
(weeks 1–6: 10, 13, 15, 20, 25, 30 min). After 6 weeks, the
study ended with post-testing (Table 1).
There was no reward for the voluntary participation other
than the opportunity to learn a meditation technique.
Participants completing the program attended in total, one
informational appointment and 6 weekly meetings, and prac-
ticed 42 daily meditation sessions.
Intervention Daily meditation for all conditions was to be
performed in a straight sitting position with the eyes
closed. The breathing meditation group was instructed to
keep their focus on the sensations of the breath at the
nostrils at all times. Throughout their practice, participants
were gently reminded to return their attention to the breath
if distracted. The body scan group was led through focus-
ing on body parts in sequence, while keeping a kind and
non-judgmental awareness of perceived sensations.
Participants in the loving-kindness condition were
instructed to recall a loving memory and extend the per-
ceived loving-kindness in sequence towards themselves,
towards a friendly person, then towards a neutral person,
and finally, towards an adversarial person. Each step was
guided by detailed instructions and standardized phrases.
Intervention Post-testing
Daily meditation weekly meeting FMI FAIR-2 SCS SEE SWLS
Daily meditation weekly meeting
Daily meditation weekly meeting
Mindfulness
Measures
Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (Short Version) The Freiburg
Mindfulness Inventor (Walach et al. 2006) assesses two facets
of mindfulness: presence and acceptance. Presence describes a
neutral observer having an experience without identifying
with it at that moment. Acceptance represents an attitude of
non-judgment, avoiding any type of valence (Sauer et al.
2013). Although there is an ongoing discussion about whether
or not mindfulness is best assessed as a one-dimensional con-
struct (Brown and Ryan 2004), Kohls et al. (2009) argued that
it is useful to disentangle the concept into these two compo-
nents in order to uncover the pathways from mindfulness to
health. While acceptance seems to be the factor responsible
for mediating the positive effects of mindfulness on mental
and physical health, it seems that presence needs to be in place
for the effects to be carried out. We used the short version of
the FMI to assess the development of mindfulness before and
after practicing the breathing meditation, the body scan, and
the loving-kindness meditation. The inventory reports a reli-
ability of Cronbach’s α = .87 (Walach et al. 2006).
Frankfurt Attention Inventory-2 The Frankfurt Attention
Inventory-2 measures attentional performance and
concentration over a period of time. Moosbrugger et al.
(2011) defined attentional performance as the extent of effort
used to concentrate voluntary attention on a chosen stimulus.
The task is to identify and mark target shapes in a pool of
similar distractor items in a predefined amount of time.
Scores are calculated from the number of shapes marked with-
in the allotted time, incorrectly marked distractor items, and
missed target items. The P (performance) score is calculated
by subtracting the number of errors from the total of all proc-
essed items. It indicates work speed. The quality of work is
expressed by the C (continuity) score and is calculated by
dividing P by the number of processed items (see the test
manual for detailed instructions; Moosbrugger et al. 2011).
The test provides two parallel test versions (forms A and B).
Target items in form A are distractor items in Form B, and vice
versa. We used Form A for baseline testing and form B for
post-testing. Cronbach’s α indicates a high retest reliability
(2 weeks) of .81 (Moosbrugger et al. 2011). Scales of the
FAIR-2 also showed a positive correlation to d2 scores
(r = .49; Petermann 2011).
Self-Compassion Scale-34-D The Self-Compassion Scale
(Bartel 2009) measures the amount of compassion individuals
may feel for themselves. Compassion is assessed by the sub-
scales (1) common humanity: the recognition that suffering is
an existential part of life and therefore experienced not only by
the self but by all humans; (2) isolation and overidentification:
the judgment of one’s negative feelings leading to withdrawal
from social interactions; (3) self-judgment: the amount of
harsh criticism of the self; and (4) self-kindness: the amount
of kind behavior towards oneself. The scales have a reliability
of α = .86 and .94 and negative correlations with depression,
fear, as well as a positive correlation with life satisfaction
(Spottke 2013, unpublished master’s thesis university of
Bremen).
Scales for Experiencing Emotions The Scales for Experiencing
Emotions (Behr and Becker 2004) consist of five independent
scales measuring the experience of and ability to regulate
one’s own emotions: (1) emotional acceptance: the ability to
accept the valence of emotions; (2) emotional flooding: the
reaction to being flooded by emotions; (3) lack of emotions;
(4) emotional regulation: the ability to regulate emotions; and
(5) self-control: the ability to control perceived emotions.
Retest reliability indicates a Cronbach’s α between .70 and
.86 for all scales and positive correlations to corresponding
scales of personality tests (e.g. Freiburg Personality
Inventory; Behr and Becker 2004).
Satisfaction with Life Scale The Satisfaction with Life Scale
(Diener et al. 1985) assesses the perceived satisfaction with
one’s own life. Life satisfaction is believed to be the cognitive
component of the concept of well-being. It thereby describes
subjective well-being by cognitive evaluation on one dimen-
sion. Its four scales showed an interviewer correlation of life
satisfaction between .61 and .81 and a reliability of α = .87
(Diener et al. 1985).
Data Analyses
To examine the differential effects of the three meditation
techniques, we performed regression analyses that made
pairwise comparisons of the gain scores (pre−/post-differ-
ences) for all dependent variables. Each condition was com-
pared to the other two (breathing meditation and body scan;
body scan and loving-kindness; breathing meditation and lov-
ing-kindness), using dummy-coded predictor variables for the
group categorization. As the expected directions for the effects
were specified in advance, all p levels are one-sided. Apart
from group as the relevant predictor, regression analyses also
contained additional predictor variables to control for the ef-
fects of age, gender, and amount of meditation practice during
the program. As some participants were not able to meditate
every day, due to varying reasons, the number of meditation
sittings per person over the 6-week period was also included,
to control for this potential confound with respect to group
comparisons. There was, however, no systematic difference
between groups (F(2,46) = .22, p = .81). In the following, only
the results for the group variable are reported.
Please note that the focus of this study was on the differ-
ential effects of specific meditation techniques, not on the
general positive effects of these techniques. Despite several

methodological problems in previous studies, general positive
effects of meditation have already been shown convincingly,
especially for healthy practitioners, using both active and pas-
sive control groups (e.g., Sedlmeier et al. 2012, 2018).
Therefore, we omitted such a control group. Nonetheless,
we compared pre- and post-tests for all techniques and all
measures and found positive effects in almost all measure-
ments (ranging from d = .18 to d = 2.43).
Results
Visual analyses of the data showed no marked deviations from
the normality assumption. Further examination with the
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test did not reveal a single significant
result. Group differences at baseline were examined and showed
no significant differences on study variables between groups,
except mindful presence. Here the loving-kindness condition
showed a smaller baseline score than the other groups. In the
following, we describe the strongest differential effects in the
text, separately for each kind of gain score, and give an overview
of all differential effects in Table 2. Means and standard devia-
tions of the original measures are presented in Table 3.
Differential Progress of Mindfulness
The body scan technique was expected to have a stronger
impact on mindfulness than the other two techniques. It did
show a tendentially higher increase in acceptance (Fig. 1,
right) compared to the breathing meditation (β = .39, p = .12)
and the loving-kindness meditation (β = − .40, p = .03) but,
contrary to our expectations, a decrease in presence compared
to the breathing condition, approaching significance (β =
− .48, p = .06) as well as the loving-kindness (β = .45,
p = .02) condition. The loving-kindness meditation showed
no differential effects to the breathing meditation in either
mindfulness dimension (Fig. 1, middle column).
Differential Progress of Concentration
and Attentional Performance
The ability to concentrate was measured with the FAIR-2. The
visual discrimination test quantifies performance and continu-
ity of performance, which we expected to show more im-
provement in the breathing meditation condition than in the
other two conditions. Results of the regression analyses
(Fig. 2) show that the body scan (β = .35, p = .04) and the
loving-kindness meditation (β = .30, p = .03) were stronger
predictors of improved performance than the breathing medi-
tation. The body scan showed a tendency towards improved
scores (β = .33, p = .06), and the loving-kindness meditation a
significant improvement β = .29, p = .03) when compared to
the breathing meditation condition.
Mindfulness
Differential Progress of Self-Compassion
Self-compassion was measured with the SCS on four subscales
and a total score. Self-compassion is a concept closely related
to mindfulness and therefore it was expected to benefit from the
condition best able to amplify mindfulness. Regression analysis
showed the strongest improvements of self-compassion for the
body scan relative to the breathing meditation condition.
Participants practicing the body scan perceived decreased iso-
lation and overidentification (β = .46, p = .01), a tendency to-
wards less self-judgment (β = .30, p = .06), and a tendentially
improved self-kindness (β = .29, p = .06). These effects were
also found in the total score for self-compassion (β = .35,
p = .03). The loving-kindness meditation group did not show
stronger effects than the body scan group or weaker effects than
the breathing meditation group (Fig. 3).
Differential Progress of Emotional Experience
and Regulation
Emotional experience and regulation was measured with the
SEE. It examined five dimensions of dealing with emotions.
The best advantages were shown for the body scan condition
when compared to the breathing meditation group. Participants
practicing the body scan exercise demonstrated strong effects
in developing the ability to regulate emotions (β = .61, p < .01)
and reduce emotional flooding (β = −.41, p = .02) as well as the
lack of emotions (β = −.57, p < .01) more effectively.
Compared to the loving-kindness meditation, the body scan
showed small or medium-sized advantages (Fig. 4).
Differential Progress of Life Satisfaction
Life satisfaction was measured on a one-dimensional
scale. Regression analysis showed a tendency for im-
provement of life satisfaction in participants practicing
the body scan meditation compared to the breathing
meditation (β = .35, p = .06) and a significant rise com-
pared to the loving-kindness meditation (β = −.43,
p < .01) over time (Fig. 5). This means that of the three
meditation techniques examined, it was the body scan
meditation that was able to improve life satisfaction
most effectively.
Discussion
The purpose of the present study was to help clarify the dif-
ferential impact of key components of different approaches to
mindfulness meditation. Therefore, we compared the effects
of three common meditation techniques (breathing medita-
tion, body scan, and loving-kindness meditation) on variables
commonly used to measure the effects of meditation
Mindfulness

Table 2 Standardized beta

coefficients for the gain scores Diff BS-BM (p) Diff LKM-BM (p) Diff LKM-BS (p)
with respective p values in
parentheses (BS, body scan; BM, FAIR-2
breathing meditation; LKM, Performance .35 (.04) .30 (.03) − .05 (.39)
loving-kindness meditation) Continuity .33 (.06) .29 (.03) − .04 (.42)
FMI
Presence − .48 (.06) .18 (.20) .45 (.02)
Acceptance .39 (.12) .02 (.45) − .40 (.03)
SCS-34-D
Common humanity − .02 (.46) .22 (.09) .24 (.11)
Isolation/overident. (rev.) .46 (.01) .14 (.21) − .26 (.08)
Self-judgment (rev.) .30 (.06) .05 (.39) − .17 (.19)
Self-kindness .29 (.06) .12 (.25) .00 (.50)
Total .35 (.03) .14 (.20) − .09 (.34)
SEE
Acceptance of emotions .21 (.15) .08 (.32) − .16 (.20)
Emotional flooding (neg.) − .41 (.02) − .20 (.12) .28 (.06)
Lack of emotions (neg.) − .57 (.01) − .15 (.18) .30 (.05)
Emotional regulation .61 (.01) .17 (.15) − .21 (.12)
Self-control .16 (.22) − .03 (.43) − .18 (.15)
SWLS .35 (.06) − .19 (.13) − .43 (.01)

FAIR-2, Frankfurter Aufmerksamkeitsinventar; FMI, Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory; SCS-34-D, Self-

Compassion Scale German Version; SEE, Skalen zum Erleben von Emotionen; SWLS, Satisfaction with Life
Scale

(mindfulness, concentration and sustained attention, self-com-
passion, experience and regulation of emotions, and life satis-
faction). Although to date there is scant research on the effects
of specific mindfulness meditation techniques, we tried to
derive some hypotheses about differential effects.
Mindfulness
The development of mindfulness is regarded as the main re-
quirement for further psychological benefits from meditation
(Carmody and Baer 2008; Kabat-Zinn 2013). In some forms of
mindfulness meditation, such as Goenka’s approach to
Vipassana, and MBSR, the body scan is introduced as a key
element for developing mindfulness (Hart 1987; Kabat-Zinn
2013). We therefore expected the body scan condition to show
the highest improvements in mindfulness in comparison with
loving-kindness meditation and breathing meditation. We
regarded mindfulness as a two-dimensional construct, defined
by the dimensions presence, and acceptance, as proposed by
Bishop et al. (2004). We found a drop in presence and a pro-
nounced rise in acceptance in the body scan group compared to
the other two conditions. This supports the findings that, mind-
fulness is a multifaceted construct (Kohls et al. 2009) and that
acceptance is responsible for the health-promoting effects
(Sauer et al. 2013). However, it contradicts the hypothesis that
presence must be in place for acceptance to unfold. Presence is
thought to be the sustained attention to current experience
(Bishop et al. 2004). Interestingly, it has been questioned
whether this ability is a valid component of mindfulness.
Factor analyses showed that the facet Observing did not fit an
overall mindfulness concept and even showed contrary rela-
tionships to other mindfulness constructs (Baer et al. 2006;
Lilja et al. 2011). Questioning these results, Lilja et al. (2013)
re-evaluated the relationship of the component in a person-
oriented approach and found that it correlated with meditation
experience. This finding is in line with our results for the body
scan condition which saw a drop in the ability to be present to
current experience by observing it. Considering the superior
effects the body scan meditation showed in comparison to the
breathing or loving-kindness meditation, its comparatively low
development in presence but stronger rise in acceptance after
the intervention could describe a process of development of
mindfulness in beginning meditators (like all our participants).
Longitudinal studies and possibly person-orientated research
(Lilja et al. 2013) are necessary to understand more fully the
processes of developing facets of mindfulness from a beginner
to an expert as they might not progress linearly.
Concentration and Attentional Performance
Concentration is a fundamental precondition for developing
mindfulness and is often practiced by keeping a sustained
focus on the breath. We expected the breathing meditation
condition to effect the highest increase in concentration.
 Mindfulness

Table 3 Means (standard deviations) for pre-test and post-intervention

Breathing meditation Body scan Loving-kindness meditation

Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post

Concentration
Performance 287.87 (57.82) 400.73 (94.97) 277.40 (46.37) 423.70 (78.56) 267.18 (61.65) 410.95 (88.78)
Continuity 272.24 (60.76) 384.86 (100.02) 263.34 (47.91) 407.89 (77.53) 256.30 (62.73) 399.12 (90.41)
Mindfulness
Presence 14.11 (1.83) 14.78 (1.30) 15.33 (2.81) 14.50 (3.62) 12.47 (2.92) 13.88 (1.83)
Acceptance 25.00 (4.61) 27.00 (4.27) 21.50 (2.35) 26.67 (4.46) 22.18 (3.96) 24.71 (3.27)
Self-compassion
Common huma. 30.38 (6.62) 32.56 (9.35) 29.50 (8.73) 30.40 (10.51) 27.00 (7.10) 32.61 (8.92)
Isolation/over. 36.44 (10.85) 37.50 (10.35) 33.90 (7.78) 42.90 (12.30) 32.91 (9.50) 36.22 (7.42)
Self-judgment 15.94 (4.07) 17.56 (5.51) 15.30 (3.43) 18.50 (4.06) 15.23 (2.99) 17.14 (4.86)
Self-kindness 16.75 (5.00) 19.75 (4.07) 18.00 (2.79) 22.00 (3.83) 15.78 (4.25) 19.83 (4.51)
Total 99.505 (19.24) 107.38 (23.98) 96.70 (12.37) 113.80 (23.25) 92.68 (16.41) 105.64 (19.82)
Emotion
Acceptance 23.25 (3.73) 23.94 (3.87) 22.30 (4.19) 24.80 (3.29) 22.29 (4.28) 23.48 (3.47)
Flooding (neg.) 18.94 (6.32) 18.50 (6.41) 20.50 (6.88) 15.70 (6.60) 21.87 (5.43) 20.17 (4.97)
Lack (neg.) 11.19 (4.05) 11.75 (3.57) 15.00 (3.59) 12.80 (3.85) 12.77 (3.77) 12.55 (3.20)
Regulation 12.73 (2.66) 13.00 (2.90) 10.70 (1.95) 13.30 (2.50) 11.87 (2.97) 13.04 (2.51)
Self-control 20.19 (3.97) 20.81 (5.27) 19.00 (3.97) 21.10 (4.61) 18.74 (4.04) 19.13 (3.56)
Life-satisfaction 26.36 (3.52) 27.00 (3.60) 26.60 (2.95) 28.80 (4.32) 26.77 (3.96) 26.05 (4.74)

Remarkably, the body scan group as well as the loving-
kindness meditation group achieved higher scores in their
ability to maintain concentration. This is surprising consider-
ing the generally assumed role of breathing meditation in gen-
erating concentration as a foundation for mindfulness (Lutz
et al. 2008; Michalon 2001). We considered several explana-
tions for this result. As mentioned already, one can argue that
any meditation technique works with directed attention in
some form (Cardoso et al. 2004) and can be expected to show
improvements in concentration over time. It is therefore not
surprising that the body scan and loving-kindness meditation
both improved the ability to concentrate. It is interesting that
the breathing meditation condition did so to a lesser extent.
Focusing attention on breath trains, three regulative skills are
necessary for the performance of visual discrimination tasks:
sustained monitoring, disengaging from distracting objects,
and redirection of attention. Consequently, one should im-
prove performance in such tasks when practicing breathing
meditation. However, tasks practiced within the techniques
of body scan and loving-kindness meditation may be similar
in nature to the visual discrimination task used in the present
study for measuring concentration (FAIR-2). Possibly, the se-
quential monitoring of different body parts or the continuous
extension of loving-kindness to successive persons is more in
line with the sequential identification of visual items than the
breathing meditation, which practices a single focus. Another
explanation could be that the complex procedures of the body
scan and loving-kindness meditation support the development
of a more complex form of concentration. It might be that the
continuous change of focus from object to object (body scan)

Fig. 1 Overview of the

standardized betas comparing Diff BS - BM Diff LKM - BM Diff LKM - BS
breathing meditation (BM), body 0.5 .45
.39
scan (BS), and loving-kindness
meditation (LKM) in their 0.3 .18
Standardized beta

differential progress of presence 0.1 .02

and acceptance over time. FMI =
Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory -0.1
(short version)
-0.3
-0.5 -.40
-.48 Presence Acceptance
Mindfulness

Fig. 2 Overview of the

standardized betas comparing Diff BS - BM Diff LKM - BM Diff LKM - BS
breathing meditation (BM), body 0.5
scan (BS), and loving-kindness .35 .30 .33 .29

Standardized beta
meditation (LKM) in their
differential progress of
performance and continuity over 0
time. FAIR-2 = Frankfurt -.04
-.05
Attention Inventory-2

-0.5
Performance Continuity

or continuous extension of loving-kindness to a person repre-
sent a more demanding exercise of attentional performance
and therefore help increase this ability to a higher extent than
observing the breath. This result is in line with findings by
Lumma et al. (2015), who showed that meditation techniques
aimed at strengthening self-compassion and meta-cognitive
skills require a higher cognitive effort than breathing medita-
tion. If this is true, it could be beneficial for beginners to start
with subjectively more demanding exercises to start develop-
ing concentration in its simple form as a precondition for
mindfulness.
Self-Compassion
For the development of self-compassion we expected the
loving-kindness meditation to show the strongest increase
through a direct fostering of compassion for the self and
others. An indirect effect on self-compassion was hypothe-
sized to follow from the practice of the body scan mediated
by a rise in mindfulness (Neff 2003a). The body scan showed
a higher impact in decreasing condemning one’s negative feel-
ings (isolation/overidentification) and harsh criticism of the
self (self-judgment) as well as in increasing kind behavior
towards the self (self-kindness) and the total amount of self-
compassion when compared to breathing meditation.
Compared to the loving-kindness meditation, the differ-
ences were less distinct. Contrary to our expectations, the
practice of compassion for the self and others did not show a
clear superiority in the development of self-compassion, in
comparison with the practice of mindful observation of the
body. On the contrary, slight but non-significant tendencies
indicated advantages of the body scan. This may suggest that,
at least for beginners, meditation techniques aimed at realizing
psychological benefits such as self-compassion by targeting
mindfulness may be more effective than methods intended to
cultivate self-compassion directly (see also Sedlmeier 2016, p.
90–91).
Emotional Experience and Regulation
We expected all three techniques to further emotion-focused
coping strategies. High levels of mindfulness have been
shown to increase the ability for emotional regulation
(Chambers et al. 2009). Due to its role in developing mindful-
ness, the body scan was regarded the most effective in doing
so. This was confirmed: we found the body scan to benefit
mindful acceptance more strongly than the other techniques,
and to increase self-compassion more strongly than the breath-
ing meditation. Improvements in those abilities may have con-
sequently led to a better way of dealing with emotions. When
compared to the breathing or loving-kindness meditation, the
body scan was able to reduce extreme ways of experiencing
emotions, such as being flooded by or lacking emotions, more
effectively. Simultaneously, it aided the development of a
stronger ability to regulate emotions. In light of the stronger
effects of the body scan condition in raising mindful accep-
tance, it seems that regulating one’s emotions is strengthened
most effectively by heightening one’s level of mindfulness

Fig. 3 Overview of the

standardized betas comparing Diff BS - BM Diff LKM - BM Diff LKM - BS
breathing meditation (BM), body .46
0.5 .35
scan (BS), and loving-kindness .30 .29
.22 .24
.14 .14
Standardized beta

meditation (LKM) in their .12

.05 .00
differential progress on
0
dimensions of self-compassion
-.02
over time. Negative poles were -.09
-.17
reversed in evaluation. SCS = -.26
Self-Compassion Scale -0.5
Common Isolation/over - Self-judgement Self-kindness Total
humanity identification (reversed)
(reversed)
 Mindfulness

Fig. 4 Overview of the

standardized betas comparing Diff BS - BM Diff LKM - BM Diff LKM - BS
.61
BM (breathing meditation), BS 0.6
(body scan), and LKM (loving-
kindness meditation) in their
differential progress on .28 .30
dimensions of emotional 0.3 .21

Standardized beta
.17 .16
experience and regulation over .08
time. SEE = Scales for
Experiencing Emotions 0
-.03
-.16 -.15 -.18
-0.3 -.20 -.21

-.41
-0.6 -.57
Emotional Emotional Lack of emotions Emotional Self-control
acceptance flooding (negative) (negative) regulation

(Chambers et al. 2009; Hayes and Feldman 2004). Even
though breathing meditation and loving-kindness meditation
have been argued to benefit emotional experience and regula-
tion (Arch and Craske 2006; Neff 2003a; Scheff 1981), the
pathway through mindfulness practice may be a more efficient
contributor. These results suggest that the development of
mindfulness may be a key factor when intending to foster
psychological benefits.
Life Satisfaction
Satisfaction with life is one of the health components that
benefit from mindfulness meditation (Mackenzie et al.
2006) through the mediating effects of mindfulness and/
or self-compassion. We therefore expected the body scan
condition to bring about the strongest improvements in
perceived life satisfaction by increasing mindfulness.
Another expectation was that life satisfaction would im-
prove through the practice of loving-kindness, by benefit-
ing self-compassion. We found that life satisfaction was
most increased in the body scan condition, which gener-
ated the highest levels of mindful acceptance. This sug-
gests that life satisfaction may be supported by
developing mindfulness. Our second expectation was that
the loving-kindness meditation would benefit life satisfac-
tion by establishing positive emotions (Fredrickson et al.
2008). This was not confirmed. In contrast, the loving-
kindness group was the least likely to increase life satis-
faction in comparison with the other conditions, which
was highly surprising. An interpretation of this result is
that participants practicing loving-kindness may have
found it difficult to generate kindness on command.
Lumma et al. (2015) have shown that loving-kindness
meditation is associated with higher cognitive effort than
breathing meditation. Frustration induced by failure to
establish and extend a loving feeling, especially in initial
stages of practice, may have led to perceived lower life
satisfaction. Our third expectation was confirmed, in that
the breathing meditation showed no notable increase in
life satisfaction when compared to the body scan.
Limitations and Future Research
The present study had to deal with a dropout rate of
47.7% resulting in a relatively small final sample size of

Fig. 5 Overview of the

standardized betas comparing Diff BS - BM Diff LKM - BM Diff LKM - BS
BM (breathing meditation), BS 0.5
(body scan), and LKM (loving- .35
kindness meditation) in their 0.3
Standardized beta

differential progress of life

0.1
satisfaction over time. SWLS =
Satisfaction with Life Scale -0.1

-0.3 -.19

-0.5 -.43
Life satisfaction
Mindfulness
student participants. An initial power analysis, using
G*Power (Faul et al. 2009), assuming medium population
effects and postulating a power of 80%, had indicated that
sample sizes per group should be about n = 50, which was
realized initially. Obviously, the attrition had a negative
impact on statistical power. However, our research was
more concerned with the size of the differential
effects—expressed in terms of βs. Moreover, most effects
are supported additionally by significant test results.
Given that our effects are valid estimates of the respective
population effects, increased statistical power should have
yielded remarkably smaller p values. Prior to recruitment,
we reflected that the validity of this design would benefit
from participants developing an intrinsic motivation for
their daily meditation routines. We therefore refrained
from offering any extrinsic motivation for completing
the program (e.g., money, a lottery, or extra credit for
courses). The main reason for dropouts seems to be the
high discipline and effort needed for daily meditation for
beginners. Most of the dropouts who gave feedback con-
firmed this assumption: They reported that they felt un-
able to keep up with the daily meditation tasks due to
conflicting obligations. The progression of the dropout
rate reduced and stabilized towards the middle of the
program.
Limitations apart, the present study indicates that different
meditation techniques might indeed yield pronouncedly dif-
ferent results for different dependent measures. These effects
might depend on meditators’ expertise as well as on the
amount of mindfulness raised. Finding out more about the
differential effects of specific meditation techniques has the
potential to increase the understanding of meditation consid-
erably and allow for custom tailoring meditation techniques to
the needs of practitioners.
Acknowledgments Thanks to Anita Todd, Ritesh Mariadas, and the
anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments.
Author’s Contributions AK designed and executed the study, performed
data analyses, and wrote the paper.
PS collaborated with the design, writing of the paper, and editing of the
final manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript
for submission.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest. There has been no further source of funding. The study has been
conducted at the Technical University of Chemnitz. Informed consent
was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Statement of Human Rights and Informed Consent All procedures per-
formed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with
the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research commit-
tee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or
comparable ethical standards. Study procedures were approved by the
ethics commission of the Chemnitz University of Technology (V-109-
15-BM-PS-Meditationstechniken-04112015).
References
Ainsworth, B., Eddershaw, R., Meron, D., Baldwin, D. S., & Garner, M.
(2013). The effect of focused attention and open monitoring medi-
tation on attention network function in healthy volunteers.
Psychiatry Research, 210, 1226–1231.
Arch, J. J., & Craske, M. G. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness:
Emotion regulation following a focused breathing induction.
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 1849–1858.
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L.
(2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of
mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45.
Bajaj, B., & Pande, N. (2016). Mediating role of resilience in the impact
of mindfulness on life satisfaction and affect as indices of subjective
well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 93, 63–67.
Bartel, C. (2009). Self-compassion: Ein Neues Konzept Positiver
Selbstzuwendung. Eine Deutsche Adaptierung der BSelf
Compassion Scale^ (Doctoral dissertation, Albert Ludwig
University of Freiburg, Germany).
Behr, M., & Becker, M. (2004). Skalen zum Erleben von Emotionen
(SEE). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Birnie, K., Speca, M., & Carlson, L. E. (2010). Exploring self-
compassion and empathy in the context of mindfulness-based stress
reduction (MBSR). Stress and Health, 26, 359–371.
Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D.,
Carmody, J., … Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: a proposed oper-
ational definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11,
230–241.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present:
mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Perils and promise in defining and
measuring mindfulness: observations from experience. Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 242–248.
Cardoso, R., de Souza, E., Camano, L., & Leite, J. R. (2004). Meditation
in health: an operational definition. Brain Research Protocols, 14,
58–60.
Carmody, J., & Baer, R. A. (2008). 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, 31, 23–33.
Chambers, R., Gullone, E., & Allen, N. B. (2009). Mindful emotion
regulation: an integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review, 29,
560–572.
Colzato, L. S., Szapora, A., & Hommel, B. (2012). Meditate to create: the
impact of focused-attention and open-monitoring training on con-
vergent and divergent thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 116.
Connor, K. M., & Davidson, J. R. T. (2003). Development of a new
resilience scale: the Connor–Davidson resilience scale (CD-RISC).
Depression and Anxiety, 18, 76–82.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The
satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49,
71–75.
Eberth, J., & Sedlmeier, P. (2012). The effects of mindfulness meditation:
a meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 3, 174–189.
Esser, J. (2012). The effects of mindfulness based cognitive therapy on
patients with chronic anxiety and depression—a pilot study
(Master’s Thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands).
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. (2009). Statistical power
analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression
analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.

Feldner, M. T., Zvolensky, M. J., Eifert, G. H., & Spira, A. P. (2003).
Emotional avoidance: an experimental test of individual differences
and response suppression using biological challenge. Behaviour
Research and Therapy, 41, 403–411.
Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M.
(2008). Open hearts build lives: positive emotions, induced through
loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1045–1062.
Gallegos, A. M., Hoerger, M., Talbot, N. L., Krasner, M. S., Knight, J.
M., Moynihan, J. A., & Duberstein, P. R. (2013). Toward identifying
the effects of the specific components of mindfulness-based stress
reduction on biologic and emotional outcomes among older adults.
Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 19, 787–792.
Goldin, P. R., & Gross, J. J. (2010). Effects of mindfulness-based stress
reduction (MBSR) on emotion regulation in social anxiety disorder.
Emotion, 10, 83–91.
Goldin, P., Ziv, M., Jazaieri, H., Hahn, K., & Gross, J. J. (2012). MBSR vs
aerobic exercise in social anxiety: fMRI of emotion regulation of
negative self-beliefs. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience,
8, 65–72.
Grier, R. A., Warm, J. S., Dember, W. N., Matthews, G., Galinsky, T. L.,
Szalma, J. L., & Parasuraman, R. (2003). The vigilance decrement
reflects limitations in effortful attention, not mindlessness. Human
Factors, 45, 349–359.
Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive and social
consequences. Psychophysiology, 39, 281–291.
Gross, J. J., & Muñoz, R. F. (1995). Emotion regulation and mental
health. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 2, 151–164.
Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004).
Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57, 35–43.
Gunaratana, V. H. (1993). Sati. Mindfulness in plain English. Somerville,
MA: Wisdom Publications.
Hart, W. (1987). The art of living: Vipassana meditation as taught by SN
Goenka. New York, NY: Harper Collins Pariyatti.
Hayes, A. M., & Feldman, G. (2004). Clarifying the construct of mind-
fulness in the context of emotion regulation and the process of
change in therapy. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11,
255–262.
Hill, C. L., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Mindfulness and its relationship to
emotional regulation. Emotion, 12(1), 81.
Hollis-Walker, L., & Colosimo, K. (2011). Mindfulness, self-compassion,
and happiness in non-meditators: A theoretical and empirical exam-
ination. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 222–227.
Hunt, M., Al-Braiki, F., Dailey, S., Russel, R., & Simon, K. (2017).
Mindfulness training, yoga, or both? Dismantling the active compo-
nents of a mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention.
Mindfulness. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12671-017-0793-z.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2013). Full catastrophe living: how to cope with stress,
pain and illness using mindfulness meditation (rev. ed.). London:
Hachette.
Khoury, B., Lecomte, T., Fortin, G., Masse, M., Therien, P., Bouchard, V.,
… Hofmann, S. G. (2013). Mindfulness-based therapy: a compre-
hensive meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 763–771.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., McGuire, L., Robles, T. F., & Glaser, R. (2002).
Emotions, morbidity, and mortality: new perspectives from psycho-
neuroimmunology. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 83–107.
Kohls, N., Sauer, S., & Walach, H. (2009). Facets of mindfulness—
results of an online study investigating the Freiburg mindfulness
inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 224–230.
Kong, F., Wang, X., & Zhao, J. (2014). Dispositional mindfulness and life
satisfaction: the role of core self-evaluations. Personality and
Individual Differences, 56, 165–169.
Krygier, J. R., Heathers, J. A., Shahrestani, S., Abbott, M., Gross, J. J., &
Kemp, A. H. (2013). Mindfulness meditation, well-being, and heart
Mindfulness
rate variability: a preliminary investigation into the impact of inten-
si ve Vi pass ana m edit ati on. I nt er na t io na l Jo ur n al of
Psychophysiology, 89, 305–313.
Kuyken, W., Watkins, E., Holden, E., White, K., Taylor, R. S., Byford, S.,
… Dalgleish, T. (2010). How does mindfulness-based cognitive
therapy work? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 48, 1105–1112.
Lilja, J. L., Frodi-Lundgren, A., Hanse, J. J., Josefsson, T., Lundh, L. G.,
Sköld, C., … & Broberg, A. G. (2011). Five facets mindfulness
questionnaire—Reliability and factor structure: a Swedish version.
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 40(4), 291–303.
Lilja, J. L., Lundh, L. G., Josefsson, T., & Falkenström, F. (2013).
Observing as an essential facet of mindfulness: a comparison of
FFMQ patterns in meditating and non-meditating individuals.
Mindfulness, 4(3), 203–212.
Lumma, A. L., Kok, B. E., & Singer, T. (2015). Is meditation always
relaxing? Investigating heart rate, heart rate variability, experienced
effort and likeability during training of three types of meditation.
International Journal of Psychophysiology, 97, 38–45.
Lutz, A., Slagter, H. A., Dunne, J. D., & Davidson, R. J. (2008). Attention
regulation and monitoring in meditation. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 12, 163–169.
Lutz, A., Jha, A. P., Dunne, J. D., & Saron, C. D. (2015). Investigating the
phenomenological matrix of mindfulness-related practices from a
neurocognitive perspective. American Psychologist, 70, 632–658.
Mackenzie, C. S., Poulin, P. A., & Seidman-Carlson, R. (2006). A brief
mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention for nurses and nurse
aides. Applied Nursing Research, 19, 105–109.
MacLean, K. A., Ferrer, E., Aichele, S. R., Bridwell, D. A., Zanesco, A.
P., Jacobs, T. L., … Wallace, B. A. (2010). Intensive meditation
training improves perceptual discrimination and sustained attention.
Psychological Science, 21, 829–839.
Michalon, M. (2001). BSelflessness^ in the service of the ego: contribu-
tions, limitations and dangers of Buddhist psychology for Western
psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 55, 202–218.
Moosbrugger, H., Oehlschlägel, J., & Steinwascher, M. (2011).
Frankfurter Aufmerksamkeits-Inventar 2. Bern: Huber.
Neff, K. (2003a). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a
healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and Identity, 2, 85–101.
Neff, K. D. (2003b). The development and validation of a scale to mea-
sure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2, 223–250.
Neff, K. D., Hsieh, Y. P., & Dejitterat, K. (2005). Self-compassion,
achievement goals, and coping with academic failure. Self and
Identity, 4, 263–287.
Neff, K. D., Kirkpatrick, K. L., & Rude, S. S. (2007). Self-compassion
and adaptive psychological functioning. Journal of Research in
Personality, 41, 139–154.
Noone, C., & Hogan, M. J. (2018). A randomised active-controlled trial
to examine the effects of an online mindfulness intervention on
executive control, critical thinking and key thinking dispositions in
a university student sample. BMC psychology, 6(1), 13.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale.
Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.
Perlman, D. M., Salomons, T. V., Davidson, R. J., & Lutz, A. (2010).
Differential effects on pain intensity and unpleasantness of two med-
itation practices. Emotion, 10(1), 65.
Petermann, F. (2011). Frankfurter Aufmerksamkeits-Inventar 2 (FAIR-2).
Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 59,
325–326.
Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence
health? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 925–971.
Raab, K. (2014). Mindfulness, self-compassion, and empathy among
health care professionals: a review of the literature. Journal of
Health Care Chaplaincy, 20(3), 95–108.
Salovey, P., Rothman, A. J., Detweiler, J. B., & Steward, W. T. (2000).
Emotional states and physical health. American Psychologist, 55,
110–121.
Mindfulness
Sauer, S., Strobl, C., Walach, H., & Kohls, N. (2013). Rasch-Analyse des
Freiburger Fragebogens zur Achtsamkeit. Diagnostica, 59, 86–99.
Sauer-Zavala, S. E., Walsh, E. C., Eisenlohr-Moul, T. A., & Lykins, E. L.
(2013). Comparing mindfulness-based intervention strategies: dif-
ferential effects of sitting meditation, body scan and mindful yoga.
Mindfulness, 4, 383–388.
Scheff, T. J. (1981). The distancing of emotion in psychotherapy.
Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 18, 46–53.
Sedlmeier, P. (2016). Die Kraft der meditation: Was die Wissenschaft
darüber weiß. [the power of meditation: What science knows about
it]. Reinbek: Rowohlt Polaris.
Sedlmeier, P., Eberth, J., Schwarz, M., Zimmermann, D., Haarig, F.,
Jaeger, S., & Kunze, S. (2012). The psychological effects of medi-
tation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 1139–1171.
Sedlmeier, P., Loße, C., & Quasten, L. C. (2018). Psychological effects of
meditation for healthy practitioners: an update. Mindfulness, 9, 371–
387.
Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2012). Mindfulness-
based cognitive therapy for depression. New York, NY: Guilford
Press.
Shapiro, S. L., & Carlson, L. E. (2009). The art and science of mindful-
ness: integrating mindfulness into psychology and the helping
professions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Shapiro, S. L., & Walsh, R. (2003). An analysis of recent meditation
research and suggestions for future directions. The Humanistic
Psychologist, 31(2–3), 86–114.
Shapiro, S. L., Brown, K. W., & Biegel, G. M. (2007). Teaching self-care
to caregivers: Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on the
mental health of therapists in training. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, 1(2), 105–115.
Spottke, L. (2013). Self-Compassion - Vom Wohlwollenden Umgang mit
sich selbst. Unpublished Manuscript, Bremem University.
Tang, Y. Y., & Posner, M. I. (2012). Tools of the trade: theory and method
in mindfulness neuroscience. Social Cognitive and Affective
Neuroscience, 8, 118–120.
Van Dam, N. T., Sheppard, S. C., Forsyth, J. P., & Earleywine, M. (2011).
Self-compassion is a better predictor than mindfulness of symptom
severity and quality of life in mixed anxiety and depression. Journal
of Anxiety Disorders, 25(1), 123–130.
Van Dam, N. T., van Vugt, M. K., Vago, D. R., Schmalzl, L., Saron, C. D.,
Olendzki, A., … Meyer, D. E. (2017). Mind the hype: a critical
evaluation and prescriptive agenda for research on mindfulness
and meditation. Psychological science. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617709589.
Vettese, L. C., Dyer, C. E., Li, W. L., & Wekerle, C. (2011). Does self-
compassion mitigate the association between childhood maltreat-
ment and later emotion regulation difficulties? A preliminary inves-
tigation. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 9,
480–491.
Walach, H., Buchheld, N., Buttenmüller, V., Kleinknecht, N., & Schmidt,
S. (2006). Measuring mindfulness—the Freiburg mindfulness in-
ventory (FMI). Personality and Individual Differences, 40(8),
1543–1555.
Wang, Y., & Kong, F. (2014). The role of emotional intelligence in the
impact of mindfulness on life satisfaction and mental distress. Social
Indicators Research, 116, 843–852.
Weibel, D. T. (2007). A loving-kindness intervention: boosting compas-
sion for self and others (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio University).
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.