Display options
Cite
Hanley AW, Dehili V, Krzanowski D, et al. Effects of Video-Guided Group vs. Solitary Meditation on Mindfulness and Social Connectivity: A Pilot Study. Clin Soc Work J. 2021;1-9doi: 10.1007/s10615-021-00812-0.
Hanley, A. W., Dehili, V., Krzanowski, D., Barou, D., Lecy, N., & Garland, E. L. (2021). Effects of Video-Guided Group vs. Solitary Meditation on Mindfulness and Social Connectivity: A Pilot Study. Clinical social work journal, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-021-00812-0
Hanley, Adam W, et al. "Effects of Video-Guided Group vs. Solitary Meditation on Mindfulness and Social Connectivity: A Pilot Study." Clinical social work journal vol. (2021): 1-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-021-00812-0
Hanley AW, Dehili V, Krzanowski D, Barou D, Lecy N, Garland EL. Effects of Video-Guided Group vs. Solitary Meditation on Mindfulness and Social Connectivity: A Pilot Study. Clin Soc Work J. 2021 Jun 24;1-9. doi: 10.1007/s10615-021-00812-0. Epub 2021 Jun 24. PMID: 34188317; PMCID: PMC8224259.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Clin Soc Work J. 2021 Jun 24;1-9. doi: 10.1007/s10615-021-00812-0. Epub 2021 Jun 24.

Effects of Video-Guided Group vs. Solitary Meditation on Mindfulness and Social Connectivity: A Pilot Study.

Clinical social work journal

Adam W Hanley, Vincent Dehili, Deidre Krzanowski, Daniela Barou, Natalie Lecy, Eric L Garland

Affiliations

  1. College of Social Work, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, USA.
  2. North Carolina State University , Raleigh, USA.
  3. Bethesda Hospital East, Boynton Beach, USA.
  4. LifeStance Health, Bellevue, USA.

PMID: 34188317 PMCID: PMC8224259 DOI: 10.1007/s10615-021-00812-0

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.

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2021.

Keywords: Group practice; Meditation; Mental health; Mindfulness; Nature; Social connectivity; Social work; Solitary practice

References

  1. QJM. 2020 Oct 1;113(10):707-712 - PubMed
  2. J Clin Psychol. 2013 Jan;69(1):28-44 - PubMed
  3. PLoS One. 2010 May 03;5(5):e10448 - PubMed
  4. Complement Ther Med. 2010 Dec;18(6):260-4 - PubMed
  5. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011 Mar 01;5(2):272-6 - PubMed
  6. J Health Psychol. 1999 May;4(3):357-63 - PubMed
  7. J Am Coll Health. 2017 May-Jun;65(4):259-267 - PubMed
  8. Health Informatics J. 2020 Sep;26(3):1560-1576 - PubMed
  9. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2010 Aug;23(4):353-9 - PubMed
  10. Mindfulness (N Y). 2014 Jan 21;2014(January): - PubMed
  11. Emotion. 2010 Feb;10(1):72-82 - PubMed
  12. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Apr;84(4):822-48 - PubMed
  13. J Clin Psychol. 2006 Dec;62(12):1445-67 - PubMed
  14. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jun;54(6):1063-70 - PubMed
  15. Australas Psychiatry. 2020 Oct;28(5):514-516 - PubMed
  16. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Apr 14;15:156 - PubMed
  17. Health Informatics J. 2015 Sep;21(3):173-94 - PubMed
  18. J Behav Med. 2014 Apr;37(2):218-33 - PubMed
  19. Acta Oncol. 2018 Oct;57(10):1293-1302 - PubMed
  20. BMC Psychiatry. 2011 Nov 08;11:175 - PubMed
  21. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2019 Oct;87(10):927-940 - PubMed
  22. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011 Oct;79(5):618-28 - PubMed
  23. NCHS Data Brief. 2018 Nov;(325):1-8 - PubMed
  24. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2020 Sep - Oct;66:89-95 - PubMed
  25. Assessment. 2006 Mar;13(1):27-45 - PubMed
  26. Conscious Cogn. 2010 Jun;19(2):597-605 - PubMed
  27. Behav Res Ther. 2013 Sep;51(9):573-8 - PubMed
  28. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009 May-Jun;28(3):w490-501 - PubMed
  29. Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2019 Sep;65(6):458-467 - PubMed
  30. J Psychosom Res. 2015 Jun;78(6):519-28 - PubMed
  31. Patient Educ Couns. 2011 May;83(2):273-7 - PubMed
  32. J Ment Health. 2020 Jul 25;:1-10 - PubMed
  33. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med. 2015 Jan;20(1):73-5 - PubMed
  34. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2014 Jun;82(3):448-459 - PubMed
  35. Sex Transm Dis. 2007 Dec;34(12):1025-9 - PubMed
  36. Open Med J. 2014;1:66-74 - PubMed
  37. J Behav Med. 2008 Feb;31(1):23-33 - PubMed
  38. Mindfulness (N Y). 2018;9(1):23-43 - PubMed

Publication Types