Woodworth Rosalind Jane, O'Brien-Malone Angela, Diamond Mark R, Schüz Benjamin
University of Tasmania, Australia.
Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2016 Jan-Apr;16(1):21-29. doi: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.07.006. Epub 2015 Sep 8.
Positive Psychology Interventions (PPIs) have been suggested as self-help tools to increase subjective well-being and happiness. However, most previous studies have been based on between-group comparisons, which are not informative with regard to trajectories of individual change over time. This study is a first attempt at examining whether completing frequently used PPIs - 'Three Good Things in Life', 'Using Signature Strengths in a New Way' and 'Gratitude Visit' -results in consistent changes in affect at the level of the individual. In an N-of-1-study design, participants were randomly allocated to one of six counterbalanced patterns of the PPIs over a 9-10 week period. The affective aspect of subjective well-being was measured daily using the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS). Hierarchical linear modelling showed significant changes in PANAS scores, but no statistically significant differential impact on positive affect of the PPIs, apart from a marginally significant time × intervention interaction for 'Using Signature Strengths in a New Way'. This suggests that frequently used PPIs do not result in changes in affect over time. This finding questions recommending the use of PPIs as self-help tools.
积极心理学干预措施(PPIs)已被建议作为提升主观幸福感和快乐的自助工具。然而,之前的大多数研究都是基于组间比较,这对于个体随时间的变化轨迹并无参考价值。本研究首次尝试检验完成常用的PPIs——“生活中的三件好事”、“以新方式运用标志性优势”和“感恩拜访”——是否会在个体层面导致情感上的持续变化。在一项单病例研究设计中,参与者在9至10周的时间内被随机分配到六种PPIs的平衡模式之一。每天使用正负情感量表(PANAS)测量主观幸福感的情感方面。分层线性模型显示PANAS分数有显著变化,但除了“以新方式运用标志性优势”存在边缘显著的时间×干预交互作用外,PPIs对积极情感没有统计学上的显著差异影响。这表明常用的PPIs不会随时间导致情感变化。这一发现对推荐将PPIs作为自助工具提出了质疑。