| Literature DB >> 32887521 |
Sen-Chi Yu1, Kennon M Sheldon2, Wen-Ping Lan2, Jia-Huei Chen2.
Abstract
Research has demonstrated that positive interventions (PIs) can be effective in enhancing well-being. Our study used Facebook to conduct a PI based on savoring. Sixty-one university students in Taiwan were randomly assigned to undergo a three-week savoring PI, and 61 participants were assigned to a no-treatment control group. The results showed significantly enhanced positive affect in the treatment group compared to the control group, in both a post-test and a final follow-up, but no significant differences between the two groups in negative affect. The treatment group also displayed significantly lower depression in the post-test, which was not maintained at the follow-up. These results indicate that, for university students, a savoring intervention via Facebook can be an effective way of enhancing positive emotions.Entities:
Keywords: Facebook; positive interventions; positive psychology; savoring; social network sites
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32887521 PMCID: PMC7503456 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17176407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Trial flow diagram.
Figure 2Changes in original mean score of PA during different stages.
Summary of Means and Standard Deviations for scores on positive affect (PA), negative affect (NA), and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D).
| Pre-Test | Post-Test | Follow-Up | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Measure | Condition | M (SD) | M (SD) | M (SD) |
| PA | Exp | 24.20 (6.07) | 25.71 (5.44) | 25.35 (4.59) |
| Con | 25.30 (6.30) | 24.33 (5.84) | 23.55 (6.28) | |
| NA | Exp | 16.61 (5.17) | 15.45 (4.73) | 15.94 (4.92) |
| Con | 15.98 (4.61) | 16.63 (4.76) | 17.29 (5.86) | |
| CES-D | Exp | 14.59 (8.58) | 12.86 (8.53) | 14.24 (8.43) |
| Con | 13.97 (8.24) | 14.91 (7.46) | 14.96 (8.61) |
Note: PA = positive affect scale; NA = negative affect scale; CES-D = Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; Exp = experimental group; Con = control group.
Figure 3Changes in original mean score of NA during different stages.
Figure 4Changes in original mean score of CES-D during different stages.