ABSTRACT
Interest in mindfulness meditation continues to grow as accumulating evidence suggests mindfulness training encourages more positive functioning. However, basic questions about the conditions best suited for realizing mindful states remain unanswered. Prominent among these is whether a group mindfulness practice setting is more effective for novice meditators than a solitary practice setting. Answering this question has assumed new urgency due to the imposition of physical distancing measures designed to stop the spread of COVID-19. In a time of limited social contact, is a simulated group practice setting better than practicing alone? This preliminary study investigated whether environmental setting impacted mindfulness practice experience by examining the effects of three simulated meditation practice environments (1. group practice, 2. nature practice, and 3. solitary practice) on state mindfulness and perceived social connectivity in a sample of novice meditators. Significant differences emerged across the three simulated practice settings. Findings suggest watching others meditate while meditating appears to most effectively induce a state of mindfulness and strengthen feelings of social connectivity. This study supports traditional beliefs about the benefits of group mindfulness practice. These findings also have implications for social workers struggling to stretch limited resources to address growing mental health demands, especially during times of heightened social isolation due to COVID-19. If a simulated group practice confers the same cognitive benefits as solitary practice while also conferring social benefits, simulated group instruction may be preferable for therapeutic and economic reasons.
ABSTRACT
As part of a larger trial of pharmacological and counseling interventions for light smokers, we performed a telephone-screening interview followed by a scheduled time for an in-person eligibility appointment. Of the 407 who screened positive and expressed interest in participation, 202 failed to attend the first scheduled appointment. This article examines person, study, and study-site characteristics that differentiated those who did follow through from those who did not. The study also examined the self-reported quit rates of both groups 12 weeks later, the time of the study termination. Analyses suggested that nonattendees were more likely to be younger, unemployed, and African American. The most frequently cited reasons for missing the eligibility appointment were work/family obligations, inconvenient appointment times, and personal schedule problems. Those who kept the initial appointment were more likely to report smoking abstinence at 12 weeks. The study has implications for increasing the utilization of potentially effective treatments for smokers.
