See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303717259

Examining the Effects of Jyoti Meditation on Stress and

the Moderating Role of Emotional Intelligence

Article in Counselor Education and Supervision · June 2016

DOI: 10.1002/ceas.12036

CITATIONS READS

12 545

3 authors, including:

Daniel Gutierrez Mark Young

William & Mary University of Central Florida
78 PUBLICATIONS 611 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 12 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Mark Young on 23 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Received 03/05/15
Revised 09/30/15
Accepted 10/26/15
DOI: 10.1002/ceas.12036

Examining the Effects of Jyoti Meditation

on Stress and the Moderating Role of
Emotional Intelligence
Daniel Gutierrez, Abigail H. Conley, and Mark Young

The authors examined whether Jyoti meditation (JM), a spiritually based medita-
tion (Singh, 2012), influenced student counselors’ (N = 60) level of stress and
emotional intelligence (EI). Results from a randomized controlled trial and
growth curve analysis provided a multilevel model in which JM reduced stress
and EI moderated the effect.
Keywords: meditation, stress, counselor education, emotional intelligence, model

A challenge facing student counselors is learning to manage the emotional

content of counseling sessions without becoming overstressed and succumb-
ing to burnout (Lawson, Venart, Hazler, & Kottler, 2007; Roach & Young,
2007; Young & Lambie, 2007). Thus, student counselors must find effective
self-care strategies (Roach & Young, 2007). Salovey and Mayer (1990) called
the capacity to manage, regulate, and use emotions emotional intelligence
(EI). Although research on counselors and the topic of EI is limited, it is
theoretically plausible to expect that EI facilitates a counselor’s ability to use
self-care strategies (Gutierrez & Mullen, in press; Salovey, Bedell, Detweiler,
& Mayer, 1999), such as meditation.
Meditation is an evidence-based strategy for emotional regulation and
self-care (Sedlmeier et al., 2012; Shapiro, Brown, & Biegel, 2007). Social
science research has shown meditation to be effective in improving physi-
cal and mental health (McGee, 2008; Ospina et al., 2007; Sedlmeier et
al., 2012). Proficient meditators are more able than nonmeditators to
reduce their response to a stressor (Goleman & Schwartz, 1976), cope
with distress (Kabat-Zinn, 2003), reduce negative emotions, and produce
increases in positive emotions (Fredrickson, Cohn, Coffey, Pek, & Finkel,
2008). A meta-analysis of meditation’s psychological effects has supported
the conclusion that meditation provides significant therapeutic benefits
(Sedlmeier et al., 2012).
Meditation has been shown to benefit counselors and student counselors
(see Geschwind, Peeters, Drukker, Os, & Wichers, 2011; Greason & Cashwell,
2009; Leppma & Young, in press). Greason and Cashwell (2009) reported that

Daniel Gutierrez, Department of Counseling, University of North Carolina at Charlotte; Abigail

H. Conley, Department of Counseling, Virginia Commonwealth University; Mark Young, De-
partment of Counselor Education, University of Central Florida. Correspondence concerning
this article should be addressed to Daniel Gutierrez, Department of Counseling, University
of North Carolina at Charlotte, 9201 University City Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28223 (e-mail:
dgutierrez@uncc.edu).
© 2016 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 109

training in mindfulness meditation increased student attention, awareness,
and counselor self-efficacy. In addition, Leppma and Young (in press) found
loving-kindness meditation to be effective in increasing student counselors’
cognitive empathy. Moreover, meditation can help student counselors exhibit
more compassionate helping behaviors (Kemeny et al., 2012), and it is recom-
mended to enhance student counselors’ self-care and psychological well-being
(Leppma & Young, in press; Roach & Young, 2007; Shapiro et al., 2007).
Although the existing literature has supported meditation as a therapeu-
tic and stress-reducing technique, it has limitations. The overall quality of
meditation research has been poor (Ospina et al., 2007; Sedlmeier et al.,
2012). Limitations in study design include participant selection bias, small
sample sizes, poor control conditions, and lack of randomized controlled
trials (Ospina et al., 2007; Walsh & Shapiro, 2006). Furthermore, the re-
search literature has offered little information about potential moderating
variables in meditation research. Important for this study, the majority of
research on meditation has been limited to two methods in particular:
transcendental meditation and mindfulness meditation (Ospina et al., 2007;
Sedlmeier et al., 2012; Walsh & Shapiro, 2006). Furthermore, mindfulness
meditation has been shown to influence EI (Chu, 2009; Lomas, Edginton,
Cartwright, & Ridge, 2013; Perelman et al., 2012); thus, EI may play a role
in the management of stress (Salovey et al., 1999). However, outside of
theoretical assumption, the research literature has shown little evidence
documenting how a participant’s level of EI influences the outcomes of
stress management techniques.
The purpose of this study, therefore, was to investigate the effect of a
spiritually oriented form of meditation on stress. The type of meditation
examined, Jyoti meditation (JM), a nondenominational, beginner’s medita-
tion emphasizing concentration and a spiritual connection, is new to the
psychological literature and has yet to be empirically validated (Singh, 2012).
In addition, we wanted to explore what factors might moderate the ef-
fectiveness of meditation on stress. Moderation occurs when a third variable
influences the direction or strength of an independent variable on a depen-
dent variable (Baron & Kenny, 1986). On the basis of a review of the relevant
literature, we hypothesized that EI would play a statistically significant role
in moderating the effectiveness of the meditation intervention. Therefore,
a second goal of this analysis was to explore the potential moderating in-
fluence of EI on the effectiveness of meditation using a multilevel model.
We wanted to know (a) would there be a difference in measured stress
levels between the student counselors who participated in a 6-week JM inter-
vention and those in a psychoeducational communication skills comparison
group and (b) would EI moderate the effect of meditation on stress? We
hypothesized that individuals who used the JM technique would experience
a statistically significant reduction in stress compared with the comparison
group. In addition, the literature suggested to us that EI might moderate
the influence of meditation on stress. Figure 1 provides a visual representa-
tion of the hypothesized model.

110 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

 Groups

Slope Intercept

Time 1 Time 1 Time 1

EI 1 EI 2 EI 3

Figure 1
Hypothesized Model for Research Question 2
Note. EI = emotional intelligence.

Method
Participants and Procedures
The appropriate institutional review board approved the study. We recruited
mental health, marriage and family, and school counseling students from
the Introduction to Counseling course at a large counselor education pro-
gram in the southeastern United States that was accredited by Council for
Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. This course
was among the first taken by students in their master’s-level counseling pro-
gram. Course requirements included participation in laboratory groups. We
informed students that both groups would be included in a research study,
but only one laboratory group would feature a meditation technique. Stu-
dents could withdraw from the study at any time without prejudice. There
was an alternative group that met the course requirement. Students not
selected for the meditation group knew they would have the opportunity
to join it later in the semester. All students in the class elected to take part
in the research study.
Sixty students participated in the study. We randomly assigned them to
either the meditation or the comparison group using research randomizer
tools (www.randomizer.org). The participants were blind to the expected
outcomes and hypotheses of the research study.
Eighty-eight percent (n = 53) of the participants were female, and 12% (n
= 7) were male. Participants’ mean age was 24 years (SD = 4.35), with ages
ranging from 20 to 47 years. The modal age of participants was 22 years.
Participants identified as White (n = 38, 63%), Latino (n = 7, 12%), Black
(n = 9, 15%), and Asian (n = 5, 8%), and one participant declined to report
race. The course was open to nondegree-seeking students (n = 3, 5%), school

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 111

counseling students (n = 19, 32%), marriage and family therapy students (n =
14, 23%), and mental health counseling students (n = 24, 40%). The majority
of participants identified as Christian (52%; n = 31), 5% (n = 3) as Muslim,
3% (n = 2) as Jewish, 2% (n = 1) as Hindu, and 13% (n = 8) as atheist; 20%
(n = 12) reported no religious affiliation and 5% (n = 3) did not report.
Most participants (73%; n = 44) indicated “yes” to the question of whether
they would describe themselves as spiritual. Slightly more than half (57%; n
= 34) answered “yes” to the question of whether they described themselves as
religious. Approximately 17% (n = 10) of participants described themselves
as spiritual but not religious. Fifty-three percent (n = 32) of participants had
meditation experience, and 22% (n = 13) currently meditated. Of those
currently meditating, some practiced mindfulness meditation (38%; n = 5),
spiritual devotional meditation (38%; n = 5), or yoga (15%; n = 2), and most
(62%; n = 8) practiced less than 90 minutes per week.
Measurement Procedure
At the onset of the study, the primary researcher administered to participants in
both groups the informed consent and a battery of assessments. The assessments
included (a) a demographics questionnaire, (b) the Trait Emotional Intelligence
Questionnaire–Short Form (TEIQue-SF; Petrides & Furnham, 2001, 2006), and
(c) the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; S. Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983).
On the 3rd and the final weeks of the 6-week study, the assessments, except for
the demographic survey, were readministered to both groups, thus providing
three measurement points. In addition, participants in the meditation group
completed a weekly meditation log in which they recorded their frequency of
meditation, experiences meditating, and motivation for the meditation practice.
The first author collected the meditation logs each week.
Instrumentation
Demographics questionnaire. The brief demographic questionnaire included
information about background, familiarity with meditation, age, gender,
race, and religious affiliation. Information was gathered about history and
frequency of meditation use. There were also two yes-or-no questions regard-
ing (a) whether participants considered themselves spiritual people and (b)
whether participants considered themselves religious people.
Meditation log. Each week of the study, participants completed a log recording
the frequency and duration of weekly meditation and qualitative information
about meditation experiences. For the latter, participants responded to a
set of open-ended questions that prompted participants to describe their
experience with and the benefits and challenges of meditation. In addition,
level of interest in meditation was reported on a 4-point Likert-type scale
ranging from 1 (not very interested) to 4 (very interested).
TEIQue-SF. EI was defined for this study as the constellations of behavioral
dispositions and self-perceived abilities that relate to the management of
emotions in self and in others (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). This ability is
most often measured using the TEIQue, developed by Petrides and Furnham

112 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

(2001, 2006). We used the short form version, the TEIQue-SF. Cooper and
Petrides (2010) examined the psychometrics of the TEIQue-SF and con-
cluded that it was effective at discriminating between individuals and that
it had good measurement precision. In the current study, the TEIQue-SF
demonstrated a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of .86.
PSS. The PSS is a widely used measure of the self-perception of psychologi-
cal distress. S. Cohen et al. (1983) tested its validity with three samples, two
consisting of college students and one a heterogeneous sample of individuals
from a smoking cessation program. The coefficient alphas were .84, .85, and
.86, respectively. In addition, the PSS demonstrated test–retest reliability,
criterion validity, and concurrent validity (see S. Cohen et al., 1983). In
the current study, the PSS demonstrated high internal consistency with a
Cronbach’s alpha of .90.
Curriculum for the meditation group. The meditation group curriculum was
developed by the Science of Spirituality, a nonprofit, nondenominational
organization (Young, 2015). This organization has existed for more than 500
years and is currently under the direction of Sant Rajinder Singh Ji Maharaj,
who developed the meditation practice used in this study (Singh, 2012).
The meditation curriculum consisted of six lectures and an experiential
component in which students practiced the technique in class. Each week
the meditation time increased, and the lectures became shorter.
Curriculum for the communication skills comparison group. The comparison
group received a psychoeducation communication skills curriculum devel-
oped by the course instructor. This group is a regular part of the student’s
counselor education program and represents a treatment-as-usual condition.
As with the meditation group, each group session consisted of a lecture and
an experiential activity. The instructor created the activities in the curriculum
from a review of the relevant literature and professional expertise.
The curricula for the meditation group and the communications skills
group were similar in structure, with periods of lecture, activity, and discus-
sion. However, the comparison group was divided into four sections of eight
or nine students each with two facilitators, whereas the meditation group
consisted of one large group of 30 students and was run by a single facilitator.
The meditation facilitator delivered the curriculum using PowerPoint slides,
and the communication skills group was less formal and used handouts.
Facilitators and Research Setting
Meditation group. The meditation instructor was a 50-year-old White man,
selected and designated by the Science of Spirituality as a certified trainer
in JM. He had more than 20 years of experience teaching and 30 years
practicing the meditation technique used in the group. He was given no
information about the study, including its purpose. Groups were held in
the large course classroom.
Comparison group. The psychoeducational communication skills groups were
held in smaller counseling clinic treatment rooms, which accommodated
about 12 individuals. The counselor education program’s 1st-year doctoral

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 113

students facilitated the groups. The doctoral students had graduate degrees in
counseling. This group of 30 participants was divided into four smaller sections
to receive the skills training. Two doctoral students facilitated each group.
Data Analysis
To (a) examine the effect of JM on student counselors’ level of stress
and (b) assess whether EI moderated the outcomes of the intervention,
we used a growth curve analysis (GCA). GCA is a statistical approach
used to examine how individuals change over time (Curran, Obeidat, &
Losardo, 2010). Growth curve models are created using either a struc-
tural equation modeling approach or a multilevel statistical procedure
(Curran et al., 2010; Singer, 1998). Given the size of our sample and
our desire to compare two groups, we selected the multilevel procedure
to analyze our data (Singer, 1998). As with other forms of multilevel
analysis (e.g., hierarchical linear modeling), growth curve modeling
accounts for the complex patterns of variability in longitudinal data
(Snijders & Bosker, 2012).
In multilevel modeling, researchers nest participants within groups. Often,
groups are nested within larger groups to determine the amount of variability
accounted for by the largest group level (e.g., classes nested inside schools).
Nesting can determine whether there are significant differences at the lowest
levels (e.g., a significant difference between clients who receive an interven-
tion at a counseling clinic) and at the highest levels (e.g., a significant dif-
ference between the clinics in which counselors work). In GCA, participant
measurements are nested within participants and treated as the lowest level.
For example, in this study, the PSS scores observed at the three different time
points (pretest, midtest, and posttest) were considered Level 1 variables and
were nested within each student at Level 2. Thus, researchers benefit from
applying a GCA because it allows an estimate of “inter-individual variability in
intra-individual patterns of change over time” (Curran et al., 2010, p. 122).
In other words, growth curve modeling is a way to determine the sources of
variability (i.e., explanatory variables) within the people in each group.
Similar to standard hierarchical linear modeling, GCA treats slopes and
intercepts as both fixed and random effects, which enables researchers to test
the variance in the intercept, the slope, and the interaction between slope
and intercept between nested groups. In our study, for example, the intercept
represents the participants’ stress score at initial status and the slope repre-
sents the participants’ rate of change. Therefore, we could identify whether
there was a significant difference between individual participants’ stress level
at the beginning of the intervention and whether individual participants
significantly differed in how quickly they changed in response to the interven-
tion. In addition, a significant interaction between intercept and slope would
indicate a relationship between participants’ level of stress at the beginning of
the study and the rate of change (e.g., the stress level of individuals starting
with a higher level of stress decreased more rapidly). Thus, we selected GCA
because it allowed us to assess the effect of the intervention and determine

114 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

how participant characteristics (i.e., EI) may have moderated the outcomes
without the limitations often present in traditional repeated-measures analysis.
We conducted the GCA using the full group (N = 60) for the moderated
model and a subsample of participants (n = 40) to test the differences be-
tween the groups of students at Level 1. Assessing whether a sample size is
adequate for a GCA is difficult and complex (Curran et al., 2010; Jackson,
2010). Regarding sample size Curran et al. (2010) noted that “what consti-
tutes adequate cannot be unambiguously stated” (p. 125).
Literature on sample size in growth curve modeling is lacking (Zhang
& Wang, 2009). The current practice is to determine adequacy by using
the highest level (Jackson, 2010) and factoring in the complexity of the
research design (Curran et al., 2010). Models with samples as small as 22
have been successfully fit (Huttenlocher, Haight, Bryk, Seltzer, & Lyons,
1991). A general rule is that sample sizes must remain higher than 50 to
avoid bias estimates (Maas & Hox, 2004, 2005), and estimates closer to 100
are preferred for complex models (Curran et al., 2010). In the current
study, the research design was relatively simple: There was one outcome
variable (stress) and 60 participants at Level 2 of the full model. On the
basis of the existing literature and the preliminary nature of our study, we
believe we had sufficient power.

Results
Statistical Assumptions and Data Cleaning
Before the analyses, data were screened for missing data and outliers. We
found neither. Therefore, there was no need to address or eliminate ex-
treme cases. The Shapiro–Wilk test of normality indicated that the data were
normal (p > .10). Visual inspection of plots of the variables confirmed the
data’s normality and linearity, meeting statistical assumptions (Tabachnick
& Fidell, 2013).
Using PROC MIXED (SAS Institute, 2013), we created a two-level model
in which Level 1 consisted of the participant’s individual growth and Level
2 expressed the variation parameters between participants. In other words,
the three observation points were nested into participants for the analysis.
Time was coded as 0, 1, and 2, where 0 represented the pretest scores, 1 the
midtest scores, and 2 the posttest scores. In addition, time was specified as
both a random and a fixed effect to capture an estimate of the intraindividual
variance (Singer, 1998). We developed three models: (a) an unconditional
linear growth model, (b) a conditional model with time and the interaction
between time and group, and (c) a conditional model with EI, stress, time,
and the interaction between time and group.

Unconditional Linear Growth Model

Creating an unconditional linear growth model is the first step in any mul-
tilevel model building (Snijders & Bosker, 2012). The unconditional linear
growth model allows for an estimate of the intraclass correlation coefficient

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 115

and is the start to the model-building process with a baseline to measure
the influence of the predictor variables (Singer, 1998). The unconditional
linear growth model examined the influence of time on stress as both a
fixed effect and a random effect.
The solution for the fixed effects of the unconditional linear growth model
indicated that the average individual began the intervention with a score of
15.95 and decreased by −1.07 points at each measurement (p < .01). Examina-
tion of the covariance parameter estimates revealed a significant variation in
the intercepts (τ00 = 20.07, p < .001) that could be explained by a person-level
covariate. In other words, there was still statistically significant variation in the
intercept that the model had yet to explain. Furthermore, the within-person
variance (σ2 = 13.04, p < .01) was statistically significant, indicating that other
time-varying predictors could be added to the model to try to explain the
variation. Last, the unconditional linear growth model had an intraclass cor-
relation of .61, which indicates that 61% of the variance between people could
be accounted for by a Level 2 (i.e., person-centered) variable.
Conditional Models
Building on the unconditional linear growth model, an interaction between
time and group was included in the fixed effects. There was no significant
interaction effect (p = .14). The inclusion of the Time × Group interaction
did nothing to explain any of the variance parameter estimates. According
to the covariance parameter estimate, the estimate for the intercepts re-
mained significant (τ00 = 20.07, p < .001), as did the within-person variance
(σ2 = 13.04, p < .01). However, we required participants to meditate in the
class and recommended they meditate at least 10 additional minutes each
day outside of class. Many participants did not meditate daily. The mean
time spent meditating during the entire 6-week intervention period was 258
minutes, with a minimum total of 46 minutes and a maximum total of 535
minutes for the 6 weeks. Only 20 participants meditated for 172 minutes (i.e.,
in class and an extra 10 minutes a week). Therefore, because we believed that
the frequency of meditation practice had an influence on the outcomes, we
reran this analysis using only the 20 participants who meditated at least an
additional 10 minutes a week outside of class and were a random selection
of the comparison group (n = 40).
In this second analysis, the fixed effects revealed a significant effect for
time (β = –4.63, p < .01) and a significant Time × Group interaction (β = 2.27,
p < .01). According to this sample, most participants had an average stress
score of 16.07, which decreased over time by 4.63 points. Furthermore, level
of stress did differ depending on group status; those in the JM group had a
significantly lower stress score at posttest (M = 11.90, SD = 6.54) than those in
the comparison group (M = 15.90, SD = 7.31), indicating a medium (Hedges g
= .57) effect size (J. Cohen, 1988). When examining the practical significance
within the individual groups, the experimental group demonstrated a large
effect size from pretest to posttest (Hedges g = .84), and the comparison group
demonstrated no practical effect (Hedges g = .01; Becker, 1988; J. Cohen,
1988). Figure 2 contains a plot of the mean stress scores over time.

116 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

 17 Group Status
= Meditation
= Comparison
16

Estimated Marginal Means 15

14

13

12

11
1 2 3
Time
Figure 2
Plot of Mean Stress Scores Over Time
We created a third model to explore the effects of EI on stress, time, and
the Time × Group interaction. In this analysis, we used the full group of
participants (N = 60). All of the tests for significance of the fixed effects
were significant. More specifically, the estimate for the intercept increased
to 47.96 from 15.95 in the unconditional linear growth model (p < .01). The
effects of time were also significant (β = –2.77, p < .01), as was EI (β = –0.19,
p < .01). Furthermore, when EI was added to the model (i.e., compared with
the fixed effects in the second conditional model with the full sample), the
interaction between time and group was significant (β = 1.26, p < .05.) Thus,
in the full sample of meditators the Time × Group interaction is significant
when controlling for EI.
As for the random effects, the residuals remained significant (p < .01),
but the estimate decreased to 12.33 from the 13.04 found in the uncondi-
tional linear growth model, indicating that the inclusion of EI did explain
some of the variation within participants. Likewise, the variance component
for the intercepts decreased, revealing that EI helped explain some of the
variation in the intercepts. The inclusion of EI accounts for 27% ([20.07 –
14.71] / 20.07) of the variation in intercepts, a large effect size (J. Cohen,
1988). Preacher, Wichman, MacCallum, and Briggs (2008) recommended
interpreting this type of cross-level interaction as a moderation effect. To
confirm the moderation effect of EI, we included a three-way interaction in
this model: time, group, and EI. As expected, the results for the interaction
were significant (β = −0.06, p < .001), indicating that EI does moderate the
effects of meditation on stress.
Discussion
The findings show that JM had a statistically significant effect on student
counselors’ level of stress. Moreover, EI moderated the influence of the

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 117

meditation technique, indicating that those with certain levels of EI may
have received a greater benefit from JM. Last, these findings suggest that
participant motivation and frequency of practice likely affected meditation’s
influence on stress among student counselors.
Role of Stress in EI
The most noteworthy finding of this study is support for the use of JM with
student counselors as an intervention for reducing stress as measured. The
findings indicated that the positive effects of JM emerged when participants
dedicated 172 minutes over the 6 weeks, which is approximately 30 minutes
per week. In addition, the GCA provided statistically significant understanding
of JM’s effects on all participants. First, the significant stress response inter-
cept variance demonstrates the degree to which individuals varied around
the population mean at the onset of the intervention (Preacher et al., 2008).
In this study, a large portion of the variance was explained by participant EI,
or the competence or disposition an individual has to understand, manage,
and use emotions (Petrides & Furnham, 2001; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). The
statistically significant contribution of EI to the intervention model indicated
that participants with higher levels of EI might be more capable of manag-
ing stress through meditation.
In addition, the GCA indicated that a participant’s level of EI contributes
to the strength of the meditation intervention. When EI was equal for all
participants, those in the meditation group emerged as having less stress
at posttest than those in the comparison group. It is unknown, however,
whether a certain level of EI directly translates to a participant’s knowing
how to use meditation more effectively or being more motivated to use
meditation or whether EI increases the potency of the meditation. Salovey
et al. (1999) suggested that EI was beneficial to coping because emotionally
intelligent people may be better able to manage distressing emotions. Thus,
the relationship between EI and stress at initial status could be the result of
participants having a better understanding of how to implement meditation
as an effective stress-reduction tool.
Influence of Participant Motivation
Our findings show the influence of participant motivation on implementa-
tion of meditation. We offered all students an opportunity to withdraw from
the study at any time, and they were offered an alternative wellness group
if they did not want to participate in meditation. Throughout and at the
end of the intervention (in their meditation journals or on the exit survey),
participants were asked to state what they thought about the intervention
as a whole. About 55% reported either no interest or only somewhat of an
interest in the group. However, no participants withdrew from the group. It
is possible that the lack of motivation of some participants in the meditation
group had a significant effect on this study’s findings.
Previous research studies have used only volunteers (Chu, 2009; Kemeny et
al., 2012; Perelman et al., 2012; Wachholtz & Pargament, 2005), which may

118 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

have ensured that the majority of participants were motivated. The partici-
pants in this study were students who registered for a counseling class and
wanted to learn counseling-related skills. Thus, they were likely more moti-
vated to learn the content taught in the comparison group (communication
skills) than the meditation practice. Researchers have criticized meditation
research for using only volunteers (see Sedlmeier et al., 2012); however, as
demonstrated in the current study, nonvolunteers present another challenge
because their lack of motivation may translate into lack of practice.
Limitations
The majority of the sample were White (63%; n = 38), female (88%; n = 53),
and in their mid-20s (M = 24 years), which is consistent with the makeup of
counseling programs in the United States (American Counseling Association,
2013). Although this sample reflects the population of counselors, it is not
similar to the U.S. population at large. Whether cultural or geographical
differences would have an influence is unknown. In addition, the instru-
mentation in this study was self-report. Although self-report measures are
arguably the only way to gain an accurate assessment of perceived stress and
trait EI (see Petrides & Furnham, 2001), participants could be completing
assessments so they look desirable rather than doing so truthfully.
Implications for Research and Counselor Education
The results of the GCA provided support for a moderating effect of EI on
student counselors’ stress levels, indicating that EI has a statistically signifi-
cant effect on stress and meditation outcomes. There is a paucity of research
on EI and student counselor stress; however, these findings indicate that EI
appears to play a role in how student counselors manage their stress and
whether they benefit from meditation intervention. Counselor educators
might consider researching student counselors’ EI and its development.
Given the stress and emotional exhaustion associated with counseling, it
is important that student counselors learn efficient and effective methods
for reducing their stress to prevent burnout (Roach & Young, 2007). JM
is a simple method that student counselors could use before, between, or
after sessions to manage some of the stress of counseling. JM is not a time-
consuming practice. Our findings indicate that JM works best with counseling
students who have a high level of EI and are motivated to practice at least
30 minutes a week. Students who have objections to meditation should not
be forced to practice it. Moreover, our initial data on participants’ inter-
est level suggest that disinterested students will most likely not practice
the approach regularly enough to achieve significant change. Thus, it is
clear that counselor educators must find other approaches more suitable
for students uninterested in meditation. Counselor educators who want
to apply JM in the classroom or clinical settings are encouraged to first
practice it themselves. Training in any meditation technique may be an op-
portunity or a barrier to introducing JM or another meditation technique
into the curriculum.

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 119

 To our knowledge, all meditation approaches stem from religious, philo-
sophical, or spiritual belief systems (Goleman, 1988). JM is not divorced from
its spiritual basis, which research has suggested may potentiate its effectiveness
(Benson & Stark, 2009; Carlson, Bacaseta, & Simanton, 1988; Wachholtz & Par-
gament, 2005). Instead, JM allows practitioners to incorporate any spiritual or
philosophical belief they choose (Singh, 2012). Regardless, counselor educators
and researchers should openly disclose the religious and spiritual underpinnings
of meditation before incorporating it in a classroom setting or with clients.

References
American Counseling Association. (2013). Membership report for May 2013. Unpublished.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in
social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Becker, B. J. (1988). Synthesizing standardized mean-change measures. British Journal
of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 41, 257–278. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1988.
tb00901.x
Benson, H., & Stark, M. (2009). Timeless healing: The power and biology of belief. New
York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Carlson, C. R., Bacaseta, P. E., & Simanton, D. A. (1988). A controlled evaluation of devotional
meditation and progressive relaxation. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 16, 362–368.
Chu, L. (2009). The benefits of meditation vis-à-vis EQ, perceived stress, and nega-
tive mental health. Stress and Health, 26, 169–180.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived
stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385–396 doi:10.2307/2136404
Cooper, A., & Petrides, K. V. (2010). A psychometric analysis of the Trait Emotional
Intelligence Questionnaire–Short Form (TEIQue-SF) using item response theory.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 449–457.
Curran, P. J., Obeidat, K., & Losardo, D. (2010). Twelve frequently asked questions
about growth curve modeling. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11, 121–136.
doi:10.1080/15248371003699969
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. doi:10.1037/a0013262
Geschwind, N., Peeters, F., Drukker, M., Os, J., & Wichers, M. (2011). Mindfulness
training increases momentary positive emotions and reward experience in adults
vulnerable to depression: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 79, 618–628.
Goleman, D. (1988). The meditative mind: The varieties of meditative experiences. Los
Angeles, CA: Tarcher.
Goleman, D. J., & Schwartz, G. E. (1976). Meditation as an intervention in stress
reactivity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 456–466.
Greason, P., & Cashwell, C. S. (2009). Mindfulness and counseling self-efficacy: The
mediating role of attention and empathy. Counselor Education and Supervision, 49,
2–19. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00083.x

120 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

Gutierrez, D., & Mullen, P. (in press). EQ and the counselor: Examining the con-
tribution of trait EQ on counselor burnout. Journal of Mental Health Counseling.
Huttenlocher, J., Haight, W., Bryk, A., Seltzer, M., & Lyons, T. (1991). Early vocabu-
lary growth: Relation to language input and gender. Developmental Psychology, 27,
236–248.
Jackson, D. L. (2010). Reporting results of latent growth modeling and multilevel
modeling analyses: Some recommendations for rehabilitation psychology. Reha-
bilitation Psychology, 55, 272–285. doi:10.1037/a0020462
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003) Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and
future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 144–156. doi:10.1093/clipsy.bpg016
Kemeny, M. E., Foltz, C., Cullen, M., Jennings, P., Gillath, O., Wallace, B. A., . . .
Ekman, P. (2012). Contemplative emotion training reduces negative emotional
behavior and promotes prosocial responses. Emotion, 12, 338–350.
Lawson, G., Venart, E., Hazler, R. J., & Kottler, J. A. (2007). Toward a cul-
ture of counselor wellness. The Journal of Humanistic Counseling, 46, 5–19.
doi:10.1002/j.2161-1939.2007.tb00022.x
Leppma, M., & Young, M. E. (in press). The effect of loving-kindness meditation on
empathy, perceived social support, and problem-solving appraisal in counseling
students. Journal of Counseling & Development.
Lomas, T., Edginton, T., Cartwright, T., & Ridge, D. (2013). Men developing emotional
intelligence through meditation? Integrating narrative, cognitive and electro-
encephalography (EEG) evidence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15, 213–224
Maas, C. J., & Hox, J. J. (2004). Robustness issues in multilevel regression analysis.
Statistica Neerlandica, 58, 127–137. doi:10.1046/j.0039-0402.2003.00252.x
Maas, C. J., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling.
Methodology, 1, 86–92. doi:10.1027/1614-2241.1.3.85
McGee, M. (2008). Meditation and psychiatry. Psychiatry, 5, 28–40.
Ospina, M. B., Bond, K., Karkhaneh, M., Tjosvold, L., Vandermeer, B., Liang, Y., &
Klassen, T. P. (2007). Meditation practices for health: State of the research. Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada: University of Alberta Evidence-Based Practice Center.
Perelman, A. M., Miller, S. L., Clements, C. B., Rodriguez, A., Allen, K., & Cavana-
ugh, R. (2012). Meditation in a Deep South prison: A longitudinal study of the
effects of Vipassana. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 51, 176–198. doi:10.1080/
10509674.2011.632814
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait EQ: Psychometric investigation with
reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 9, 425–480.
Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2006). The role of trait EQ in a gender-specific
model of organizational variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 552–569.
doi:10.1002/per.416
Preacher, K. J., Wichman, A. L., MacCallum, R. C., & Briggs, N. E. (2008). Latent
growth curve modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Roach, L. F., & Young, M. E. (2007). Do counselor education programs promote
wellness in their students? Counselor Education and Supervision, 47, 29–45.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2007.tb00036.x
Salovey, P., Bedell, B. T., Detweiler, J. B., & Mayer, J. D. (1999). Coping intelligently:
EQ and the coping process. In C. R. Snyder (Ed.), Coping: The psychology of what
works (pp. 141–164). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). EQ. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9,
185–211. doi:10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG
SAS Institute. (2013). SAS/STAT 13.1 user’s guide: The MIXED procedure. Cary, NC: Author.

Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55 121

Sedlmeier, P., Eberth, J., Schwarz, M., Zimmermann, D., Haarig, F., Jaeger, S., &
Krunze, S. (2012). The psychological effects of meditation: A meta-analysis. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 138, 1139–1171. doi:10.1037/100288168
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, 105–115.
Singer, J. D. (1998). Using SAS PROC MIXED to fit multilevel models, hierarchi-
cal models, and individual growth models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral
Statistics, 23, 323–355.
Singh, R. (2012). Meditation as medication for the soul. Lisle, IL: Radiance.
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic
and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Wachholtz, A., & Pargament, K. (2005). Is spirituality a critical ingredient of medi-
tation? Comparing the effects of spiritual meditation, secular meditation, and
relaxation on spiritual, psychological, cardiac, and pain outcomes. Journal of
Behavioral Medicine, 28, 369–384. doi:10.1007/s10865-005-9008-5
Walsh, R., & Shapiro, S. L. (2006). The meeting of meditative disciplines and Western
psychology: A mutually enriching dialogue. American Psychologist, 61, 227–239.
Young, M. E. (2015). Jyoti meditation curriculum. Unpublished manuscript.
Young, M. E., & Lambie, G. W. (2007). Wellness in school and mental health systems:
Organizational influences. The Journal of Humanistic Counseling, 46, 98–113.
Zhang, Z., & Wang, L. (2009). Statistical power analysis for growth curve models
using SAS. Behavior research methods, 41, 1083–1094. doi:10.3758/brm.41.4.1083

122 Counselor Education & Supervision • June 2016 • Volume 55

 Copyright of Counselor Education & Supervision is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.

View publication stats