Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Frontiers in Psychology logoLink to Frontiers in Psychology
. 2023 Jan 11;13:1072548. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1072548

Dispositional mindfulness and mental health among Chinese college students during the COVID-19 lockdown: The mediating role of self-compassion and the moderating role of gender

Dan Zhang 1,2,3,*,†, Jianbo Shen 4,†
PMCID: PMC9874968  PMID: 36710840

Abstract

College students’ mental health has been seriously impacted during the global COVID-19 lockdown. There is evidence that dispositional mindfulness is beneficial to mental health. However, few studies have looked at the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health from the standpoint of self-compassion. Furthermore, it is unclear under what circumstances dispositional mindfulness is linked to mental health during COVID-19 lockdown. To fill this gap, the current study investigated self-compassion as a possible mediating factor and gender as a possible moderating effect between dispositional mindfulness and mental health. The sample included 1,018 Chinese university students during the COVID-19 lockdown (M age = 20.12; SD age = 1.17) who had completed self-report questionnaires on dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health. According to the findings of mediation analysis, self-compassion partially mediated the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health. The moderating analysis also revealed significant moderating effects of dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health. Male college students’ mental health was significantly better protected, and the buffering effects of dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion on their mental health were significantly stronger than those of female college students. These findings advance our understanding of the process and mechanism between dispositional mindfulness and mental health, broadened and deepened the understanding of the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health, as well as the mediating role of self-compassion and the moderating role of gender, and offer practical guidance for improving college students’ mental health during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Keywords: COVID-19 lockdown, dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, mental health, mediating effect, gender

1. Introduction

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, home isolation, social distancing, and cordoning off public spaces have become common measures to stop the spread of the virus (World Health Organization, 2020). The state of alert for COVID-19 was accompanied by a state of alert for human mental health. Many experts consider the occurrence of mental health problems during COVID-19 to be a parallel pandemic (Mucci et al., 2020). The authors emphasize that many people suffer from depression and anxiety as a result of social isolation and distancing (Hall et al., 2008). More than 70 million people worldwide have suffered from depression and 90 million from anxiety since the outbreak of COVID-19. Previous studies have reported that during the COVID-19 lockdown, approximately a quarter of patients with mental disorders were diagnosed with anxiety at the time of consultation, followed by depression (17.5%) (Ramadan et al., 2022). A meta-analysis of the prevalence of anxiety and depression in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 lockdown showed that the first COVID-19 lockdown increased the prevalence of anxiety and depression in the general population compared to pre-pandemic data, where a 26.35% increase in anxiety and a 27.88% increase in depression were observed (Dettmann et al., 2022).

According to some studies, the vulnerable age group for general mental health during the COVID-19 outbreak is 21–40 years. Other researchers discovered that participants under the age of 35 had higher levels of anxiety and depression than other age groups (Ahmed et al., 2020; Huang and Zhao, 2020). Furthermore, anxiety and depression levels among students have increased (Wang et al., 2020).

College is a transitional period in life, where students face numerous mental health risks such as academic, financial, and social pressures, increasing responsibility, a desire for success, and support resource conversion (Cooke et al., 2006; Tosevski et al., 2010; Liu et al., 2019). During the COVID-19 lockdown, students faced many issues, such as long-term isolation from others on campus, especially people they care about (Cao et al., 2020), restricted travel, and uncertainty about whether or when the examination would be held. Activities to cope with emotions were limited (such as leaving campus only when necessary, maintaining social distance, prohibiting large gatherings, and so on). They were also concerned about their future academic standing and the difficulty of finding work in the future. This led to great psychological distress and aggravated mental health problems (Wang et al., 2020). During the COVID-19 outbreak, an early study on a sample group of college students showed that college students had higher anxiety levels than the general population (Wang and Zhao, 2020). A survey of college students found that more than half of the students (65.3%) reported low well-being during the pandemic (Dodd et al., 2021). During closed isolation, some people with no history of mental disorders develop depression and anxiety issues (Luykx et al., 2020; Otu et al., 2020).

To better protect students’ mental health, it is critical to pay attention to the protective factors, mediating mechanisms, and regulating mechanisms that affect their mental health during COVID-19 lockdown.

1.1. The relation between dispositional mindfulness and mental health

Along with the rise and popularity of positive psychology, researchers widely consider mindfulness as a positive protective factor and a key variable in individual development. Mindfulness impacts individual mental health and well-being, particularly under environmental change, and mindfulness is a strong predictor of individual positive adaptation outcomes. College students face multiple internal and external risks during the COVID-19 lockdown. Mindfulness is a positive psychological resource and trait, which is considered an important protective factor in the development of life and various outcomes (Huang et al., 2021b). Mindfulness can increase positive qualities such as awareness, insight, wisdom, compassion, and serenity (Kabat-Zinn, 2000; Goldstein, 2002), which protects mental health. Therefore, college students should be cared for and supported to overcome the COVID-19 crisis by focusing on their mindfulness (Tran et al., 2022). Some scholars have argued that mindfulness is a trait that improves with practice or experience. According to their findings, there are four types of mindfulness: traits, states, training, and treatment. Mindfulness was viewed as a stabilizing quality in this study (Chiesa, 2013; Good et al., 2016). Dispositional mindfulness is defined as a person’s ability and proclivity to maintain mindfulness in daily life, to adopt a nonjudgmental and accepting attitude, and to focus on thoughts and feelings in the present moment (Brown and Ryan, 2003). They are extremely important psychological resources for helping people cope with stress and adversity (Dixon and Overall, 2016), and people develop long-term changes in cognitive, emotional, or behavioral tendencies (Bajaj et al., 2016).

In isolation conditions, one of the most important indicators of individual health is mental health, which is defined as a state of optimal human functioning beyond the experience of well-being [for example, Ryff and Keyes, 1995]. Because mindfulness is achieved by focusing attention on immediate experience, people recognize that thoughts and emotions are mental events, not facts, and can change mental habits such as anxiety and depression. Recent research has reported that dispositional mindfulness is negatively associated with anxiety and depression (Lam et al., 2020) and can effectively improve individual subjective well-being and mental health (Nyklíček et al., 2011).

According to the Dual-factor Model of Mental Health, when describing the level of young people’s mental health, the assessment indicators should include both positive subjective well-being and negative psychopathological symptoms (Greenspoon and Saklofske, 2001; Eklund et al., 2010). Among the positive indicators, the predecessors used life satisfaction to assess subjective well-being (Diener et al., 1985; Huppert, 2009). Satisfaction with life is a standard to evaluate individual positive psychological status as a core index to measure individual happiness and quality of life (Cowen, 1994). Anxiety and depression have been the most commonly used negative psychological indicators in previous research (American Psychiatric Association, 2000; Greenspoon and Saklofske, 2001; Merrell, 2008; Eklund et al., 2010; Hides et al., 2020). This study assessed people’s mental health using life satisfaction, anxiety and depression (Wang et al., 2016).

1.2. The mediating role of self-compassion

Self-compassion has been described as being kind to oneself in the face of difficulties and failures, being able to accept one’s shortcomings and deficiencies, being able to assess oneself objectively, and being kind and caring when one is sad and depressed (Neff, 2003a, 2009).

Some studies have reported that mindfulness and self-compassion are positively correlated, with mindfulness being a source and inner exploration of self. People who have high levels of self-compassion have a more balanced and objective view of negative life events, so they often experience fewer negative emotions (Neff, 2009). When people with high self-compassion face their own shortcomings, they tend to adopt a friendly and enthusiastic manner that can enhance their positive emotional and subjective well-being (Hollis-Walker and Colosimo, 2011). Self-compassion has been shown to have a positive impact on the mental health and well-being of adults (e.g., nurses) COVID-19 (Gerace, 2022).

1.3. The moderating effect of gender

A cohort study from Saudi Arabia showed that being female during the COVID-19 lockdown was significantly correlated with a higher likelihood of Emergency Department (Ed) visits for mental health disorders compared to male dominance before the COVID-19 pandemic (Ramadan et al., 2022). During the COVID-19 pandemic, female college students are more at risk for symptoms of depression and anxiety, and their negative emotions are positively associated with depression and anxiety (Carlucci et al., 2020; Mazza et al., 2020). Previous research has found a link between gender, dispositional mindfulness, and comorbid symptoms of psychopathology, with males having a higher level of dispositional mindfulness than females in a sample of undergraduates (Wang and Chopel, 2020). Subgroup analyses revealed that female college students had a higher overall morbidity of depressive symptoms than male college students, and there were differences in the morbidity of anxiety and depressive symptoms in college students from different countries (Chang et al., 2021).

According to previous research on self-compassion and adolescent development, as adolescents undergo significant physiological changes, there are significant gender differences in self-compassion, with female adolescents exhibiting lower levels of self-compassion than male adolescents of the same age. Gender is associated with an increase in psychopathological symptoms such as anxiety and depression (Copeland et al., 2011). Gender moderates the relationship between self-compassion and anxiety and depression symptoms, and self-compassion has a greater protective effect on anxiety and depression in male college students than in female college students (Galla, 2016).

2. The present study

Previous research on the mental health of college students during the COVID-19 lockdown found that mindfulness is a predictor of mental health and a protective factor against stress, but empirical research on the mediating and moderating mechanisms was lacking. In this study, we hypothesized that there is a moderated mediation model in which dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion are predictors of subjective well-being, self-compassion has a mediating effect between dispositional mindfulness and mental health. Gender plays a moderating role between dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

The proposed conceptual model.

Hypothesis 1: The relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health is mediated by self-compassion; that is, dispositional mindfulness is positively related to self-compassion, and self-compassion is positively related to mental health.

Hypothesis 2: Gender has a moderating effect on the direct relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health, i.e., male college students' dispositional mindfulness correlates more strongly with mental health than female college students.

Hypothesis 3: Gender will moderate the indirect effect of mindfulness on mental health; that is to say, male college students have a stronger correlation between dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion, and male college students have a stronger correlation between self-compassion and mental health. The effect of dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion on mental health is greater in male college students than in female college students.

3. Materials and methods

3.1. Participants and procedure

3.1.1. Participants

We chose a full-time target university in the lockdown area for participant recruitment for the limited lockdown areas in China in September 2022. We invited 1,248 students from the target university’s department of social science and polytechnic to participate in the online survey to ensure a diverse sample. The school’s program administrator, who keeps track of the students’ enrollment, assists with the recruitment process. Students were instructed not to distribute online survey links to others. Given the low response rate of online surveys, an incentive of 8 RMB (about 1.1 USD) was provided for participation. The test period was late September 2022, during an outbreak of COVID-19 omicron virus infections in Wuhan, China. The government has imposed a strict and ongoing lockdown on this university since the beginning of the semester to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Every college student was required to study, stay in school, and take nucleic acid tests every other day. This lockdown lasted 4 weeks. By early October 2022, 1,025 students had completed and submitted the survey. We had a final analytic sample of 1,018 college students after excluding 7 cases due to incomplete answers. The response rate was 82%.

3.1.2. Procedure

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee for Psychological Research of the corresponding author’s institution. We used questionnaires with high reliability and validity, which are widely used. The wording of some questions was changed to motivate participants to give accurate answers (MacKenzie and Podsakoff, 2012). Participants indicated their informed consent before the data collection by ticking a box on the informed consent item. The consent form included a brief description of the research project. The participants were informed that their provided information will be kept confidential and anonymous. Their responses would be used only for research purposes, and that they could withdraw at any time without penalty. The questionnaires were completed in about 25 min by the participants.

3.2. Measures

3.2.1. Dispositional mindfulness

Dispositional mindfulness was measured using the short form of FFMQ-SF (Bohlmeijer et al., 2011), a reliable and valid instrument that supports the multi-faceted structure of mindfulness as previously proposed (Baer et al., 2006). In the current sample of college students, we performed the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the validity of the construct. The index of CFA of this scale showed a good fit: χ2/df = 1.759, RMSEA = 0.027, CFI = 0.989, TLI = 0.988 SRMR =0.021. The scale includes 24 items, acting with awareness (e.g., I cannot pay attention to the things I am doing; reverse scoring; α = 0.904); non-judgmental (e.g., I judge my own thoughts as good or bad; reverse scoring; α = 0.912); non-responding (e.g., I observe my feelings without getting lost in them; α = 0.906); description (e.g., I naturally like to put my experiences into words; α = 0.909); observation (e.g., I pay attention to the things like the wind in my hair or sunshine on my face; α = 0.882). Cronbach’s α of the entire scale was 0.950. A 7-point Likert scale (1 = never, 7 = always) was used.

3.2.2. Self-compassion

The Chinese version of Neff’s Self-Compassion Scale was used to assess self-compassion (Neff, 2003b). The scale and its Chinese translation have been used in cross-cultural studies, and their reliability and validity have been confirmed (Neff, 2003b; Neff et al., 2018; Huang L. et al., 2021). The CFA indicated that this scale has a good fit: χ2/df = 1.687, RMSEA = 0.026, CFI = 0.988, TLI = 0.987， SRMR = 0.019. It contains 26 elements and six factors: self-kindness, shared humanity, and mindfulness; self-cold, isolation, and over immersed. Two example questions are: “I try to see my failings as part of the human condition” and “When I’m feeling down, I obsess to fix everything that’s wrong.” In the current sample, Cronbach’s α of the entire scale was 0.947 and of the individual subscales was 0.903, 0.876, 0.883, 0.899, 0.882, and 0.882. Items are rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (never) to 7 (always).

3.2.3. Mental health

3.2.3.1. Satisfaction with life

We used the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Pavot and Diener, 2008) to measure the participants’ life satisfaction. The SWLS is a widely used, well-validated, and concise instrument for measuring general well-being with five items. Participants rate items (for example, “I am satisfied with my life”) on a 7-point Likert scale, indicating how much they agree or disagree with each statement. Higher scores indicate higher levels of life satisfaction. The CFA indicated that this scale provides an acceptable fit: χ2/df = 7.355, RMSEA = 0.079, CFI = 0.989, TLI = 0.979 SRMR = 0.016. Cronbach’s α is equal to 0.899.

3.2.3.2. Anxiety and depression

The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was developed by Zigmond AS and Snaith RP in 1983 (Zigmond and Snaith, 1983). The HAD consisted of 14 items, of which 7 items were rated with depression and 7 with anxiety. There were six reversed questions, five on the depression subscale and one on the anxiety subscale. Lower scores indicate better levels of anxiety and depression in life. The CFA indicated that this scale provides an acceptable fit: χ2/df = 2.370, RMSEA = 0.037, CFI = 0.989, TLI = 0.987 SRMR =0.016. The Cronbach’s α of the total scale was 0.902, and each subscale was 0.922, 0.927.

The CFA of satisfaction with Life and anxiety and depression showed a good fit to the data: χ2/df = 1.999, RMSEA = 0.031, CFI = 0.988, TLI = 0.986, SRMR = 0.020. The total average score for mental health was calculated by principal component analysis.

4. Data analysis

We first used descriptive statistics and correlation analysis for variables of interest to analyze the survey data. Second, the SPSS macro-PROCESS (Hayes, 2013) was conducted to investigate further the mediating effect of self-compassion and the moderating effect of female/male in the correlation between dispositional mindfulness and mental health. As age, grade, single child status, residential location (Sedlmeier et al., 2012; Homan, 2016; Bluth et al., 2017; López et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2021), and meditation (Kabat-Zinn, 1994; Soler et al., 2014; Bergomi et al., 2015) of college students have been linked to dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health, we controlled for the potential influence of these constructs in the data analysis. In addition, the results of Harman’s univariate test showed that there were 14 different factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 and that the largest factor currently accounted for 28.984% of the variance (threshold level & LT; 35%) to check for possible bias from the common method to test. Therefore, there is no overall method bias in this study.

5. Results

5.1. Descriptive statistics and correlational analyses

This sample contained 34% males and 66% females. Participants ranged in age from 17 to 24 years (M-age = 20.12; SD-age = 1.17), with 4.2% in freshmen, 15.6% in sophomores, 44.1% in juniors, and 36.1% in seniors (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Demographic information.

Sample characteristics Type No. Percentage
Gender Female 672 66.0
Male 346 34.0
Single child status Yes 385 37.8
No 633 62.2
Age 17.00 8 0.8
18.00 69 6.8
19.00 227 22.3
20.00 335 32.9
21.00 265 26.0
22.00 97 9.5
23.00 14 1.4
24.00 3 0.3
Grade Freshman 43 4.2
Sophomore 159 15.6
Junior 449 44.1
Senior 367 36.1
Residence location City 329 32.3
Rural 689 67.7
Meditation No 226 22.2
Yes 792 77.8
Open in a new tab

Pearson’s correlation coefficient matrix, mean, and standard deviation of all variables are shown in Table 2. Pearson’s correlation coefficient test revealed that dispositional mindfulness was significantly positively correlated with self-compassion and mental health (p < 0.01). Further, there was a significant positive correlation between self-compassion and mental health (p < 0.01). It can be seen that the relationship between variables in this study has been preliminarily confirmed, and the research hypothesis can be further tested.

Table 2.

Correlation analysis of variables.

Variables M SD DM SC MH
DM 4.333 0.893 1.000
SC 4.440 0.855 0.472** 1.000
MH 4.779 1.217 0.478** 0.591** 1.000
Open in a new tab

N = 1,018. M, mean; SD, standard deviation; DM, dispositional mindfulness; SC, self-compassion; MH, mental health, **p < 0.01.

5.2. Testing for the mediation model (self-compassion as mediator)

Table 3 testing the mediation role of self-compassion.

Table 3.

Testing the mediation role of self-compassion.

Criterion Predictors β SE t R R 2 Adjusted R2 F
MH
Age −0.014 0.014 −1.044*** 0.511 0.261 0.256 59.453***
Grade −0.011 0.019 −0.560
Single child status 0.024 0.033 0.734
Residence location −0.161 0.035 −4.653***
Meditation 0.161 0.039 4.121
DM 0.288 0.018 15.811***
SC
Age 0.073 0.020 3.611 0.506 0.256 0.252 58.111***
Grade −0.010 0.028 −0.351
Single child status 0.017 0.048 0.344
Residence location −0.230 0.051 −4.508***
Meditation 0.093 0.057 1.620***
DM 0.414 0.027 15.451***
MH
Age −0.037 0.012 −3.022** 0.646 0.417 0.413 103.130***
Grade −0.008 0.017 −0.449
Single child status 0.019 0.029 0.648
Residence location −0.090 0.031 −2.877**
Meditation 0.132 0.035 3.795***
DM 0.159 0.018 8.818***
SC 0.312 0.019 16.438***
Open in a new tab

N = 1,018. DM, dispositional mindfulness; SC, self-compassion; MH, mental health, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

First, Hayes’ Model 4 of the PROCESS program was used to examine the mediating effect of self-compassion between dispositional mindfulness and mental health (Hayes, 2013). Taking into account covariates such as residential location, age and grade, status as an only child, meditation or not, the table revealed that dispositional mindfulness scores positively predicted self-compassion (β = 0.414, t = 15.451, p < 0.001) and mental health (β = 0.288, t = 15.811, p < 0.001). Controlling the independent variable dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion positively predicted mental health (β = 0.312, t = 16.438, p < 0.001). Hypothesis 1 is tested.

Second, Table 4 demonstrated that self-compassion partially mediates the effect between dispositional mindfulness and mental health, since both the direct effect of dispositional mindfulness on mental health and the mediating role of self-compassion did not contain 0 within Bootstrap 95% confidence intervals. These direct (0.159) and mediating (0.129) roles accounted for 55 and 45% of the total effect (0.288), respectively. Hypothesis 2 is tested.

Table 4.

Mediation effect of self-compassion.

Mental health Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI Effect percentage
Total effect of DM 0.288 0.018 0.252 0.324
Direct effect of DM 0.159 0.018 0.123 0.194 55.11%
Mediate effect of SC 0.129 0.013 0.106 0.156 44.89%
Open in a new tab

N = 1,018. DM, dispositional mindfulness; SC, self-compassion; MH, mental health.

5.3. Testing for gender as moderator

In the study, to test a moderated mediation model, we run the PROCESS macro (Model 59) (Hayes, 2013) to test the moderating effect of self-compassion. After gender was included in the model, dispositional mindfulness significantly predicted self-compassion (β = 0.418, t = 15.898, p < 0.001) (Table 5). The interaction term between dispositional mindfulness and gender (a × b) was a significant positive predictor of self-compassion (β = 0.353, t = 6.530, p < 0.001). Dispositional mindfulness was a significant positive predictor of mental health (β = 0.144, t = 7.746, p < 0.001), as was self-compassion (β = 0.312, t = 15.826, p < 0.001). The interaction term (a × b) between dispositional mindfulness and gender was an important predictor of mental health with significant predictive effects (β = 0.108, t = 2.499, p < 0.05). The interaction term between gender and self-compassion (b × c) is a significant predictor of mental health (β = 0.198, t = 4.382, p < 0.001).

Table 5.

Testing the gender as a moderator.

Criterion Predictors β SE t R R 2 Adjusted R2 F
SC 0.536 0.287 0.282 50.873***
Age 0.075 0.020 3.784***
Grade 0.000 0.028 −0.007
Single child status 0.029 0.047 0.619
Residence location −0.227 0.050 −4.539***
Meditation 0.063 0.056 1.112
DM 0.418 0.026 15.898***
Gender −0.064 0.048 −1.322
Gender*DM(a × b) 0.353 0.054 6.530***
MH Age 0.673 0.454 0.448 83.562***
Grade −0.036 0.012 −2.973**
Single child status −0.002 0.017 −0.100
Residence location 0.024 0.028 0.858
Meditation −0.088 0.030 −2.916**
Age 0.112 0.034 3.309**
DM 0.144 0.019 7.746***
SC 0.312 0.020 15.826***
Gender 0.009 0.029 0.324
Gender*DM(a × b) 0.108 0.043 2.499*
Gender*SC(b × c) 0.198 0.045 4.382***
Conditional indirect effect analysis Effect BootSE BootLLCI BootULCI
Female 0.073*** 0.012 0.051 0.098 0.073***
Male 0.288*** 0.022 0.247 0.331 0.288***
Index 0.215*** 0.024 0.170 0.263 0.215***
Open in a new tab

N = 1,018. DM, dispositional mindfulness; SC, self-compassion; MH, mental health, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

The indirect effects of mindfulness on self-compassion and self-compassion on mental health in all genders (see Table 5) are both significant. For females, the 95% confidence interval does not include 0 [0.051, 0.098], and the effect value was 0.073; for males, the 95% confidence interval does not contain 0 [0.247, 0.331], and the effect value was 0.288. Furthermore, the difference in indirect effects between high and low does not contain 0, indicating that the mediating effect is significant. These findings indicated that gender is enhanced by mindfulness and the indirect role of self-compassion on mental health, and when gender is male, the mediating effect is more substantial. Hypothesis 3 is tested.

The values of the direct effect of dispositional mindfulness, the values of the mediating effect of self-compassion, and the bootstrap 95% confidence intervals are shown in Table 6. The dispositional mindfulness value has an important positive predictive effect on self-compassion in male students (β = 0.650, t = 14.581, p < 0.001). The female students’ dispositional mindfulness score had an important positive predictive effect on self-compassion (β = 0.298, t = 9.360, p < 0.001), but the female students’ self-compassion increased at a slower rate as their dispositional mindfulness scores increased than males (see Figure 2).

Table 6.

Effects under different gender conditions.

Total effect Gender Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
DM-MC Female 0.298 0.032 9.360 0.000 0.235 0.360
Male 0.650 0.045 14.581 0.000 0.563 0.738
DM-MH Female 0.108 0.020 5.351 0.000 0.068 0.147
Male 0.215 0.038 5.635 0.000 0.140 0.290
SC-MH Female 0.245 0.021 11.664 0.000 0.204 0.286
Male 0.443 0.040 10.967 0.000 0.364 0.522
Open in a new tab

N = 1,018. DM, dispositional mindfulness; SC, self-compassion; MH, mental health.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

The moderating effect of gender in the association between dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion.

Dispositional mindfulness had a significant positive predictive role on male students’ mental health (β = 0.215, t = 5.635, p < 0.001). Simultaneously, dispositional mindfulness in females was a significant positive predictor of mental health (β = 0.108, t = 5.635, p < 0.001). However, as dispositional mindfulness increased, females’ mental health scores increased more slowly than those of male college students (see Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

The moderating effect of gender in the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health.

The positive predictive role of self-compassion on the mental health of male students is significant (β = 0.443, t = 10.967, p < 0.001), and self-compassion of female students has a significant positive predictive role on mental health (β = 0.245, t = 11.664, p < 0.001). However, as self-compassion increased, females’ mental health improved more slowly than those of male college students (see Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

The moderating effect of gender on the association between self-compassion and mental health.

In general, gender has a significant moderating effect on dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health. This observation suggests that dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion have a stronger protective and buffering effect in male college students than in females during the COVID-19 lockdown.

6. Discussion

The positive role of mindfulness in mental health has garnered widespread attention and empirical support during the COVID-19 pandemic (Demirdogen et al., 2022; Goldberg et al., 2022). This work extends previous studies by demonstrating the linking mechanisms between dispositional mindfulness and mental health. Recent research suggests that self-compassion mediates the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health. Gender influences the relationship between the three, with males having a stronger influence than females. These findings suggest that mindfulness and self-compassion are potential mechanisms for mental health during COVID-19 lockdown, and that male students are better at dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health than females, while females require more psychological support. This study uncovered the potential mechanism of dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion affecting mental health and provided a reference for developing targeted mental health intervention programs during the COVID-19 lockdown.

6.1. The effect of dispositional mindfulness on mental health

There is ample evidence that dispositional mindfulness is a positive and protective resource for medicine, health care, and psychology (Batchelor, 1994), as it is associated with greater subject well-being and involves less depression and anxiety (Brown and Ryan, 2003). Furthermore, our findings support the findings of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that show mindfulness significantly affects depressive and anxiety symptoms (Strauss et al., 2014; Chu et al., 2018). Dispositional mindfulness has also been found to be a good predictor of self-compassion, depression, anxiety, and subjective well-being in nonclinical populations under COVID-19 lockdown conditions (Conversano et al., 2020). Regarding the relationship between mindfulness and mental health, our results support the Buddhist theory of mindfulness (Batchelor, 1994; Shapiro et al., 2006; Brown et al., 2007), which as a traditional Buddhist teaching, is the core intention of mindfulness. It is believed that mindfulness assists in cultivating the loving mind or bodhicitta and transforming unhealthy and unskilled traits into wholesome and skillful traits for the benefit of all beings (Gethin, 1992/2001). It has also been found that high levels of optimism mindfulness correlate with high levels of self-compassion (Duarte and Pinto-Gouveia, 2017); also, mindfulness can effectively improve individual self-compassion (Eklund et al., 2010), stabilize individual attention and calm mind (called Shamatha in Sanskrit; Bodhi, 2011), and achieve true inner transformation by deliberately choosing and focusing on positive mental states to promote happiness and achieve mental health (Lama and Cutler, 1998). Therefore, universities and psychotherapists can use dispositional mindfulness as an important tool to assist students in combating potential anxiety and depression and increasing happiness during the COVID-19 pandemic (González-García et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021a).

6.2. The mediating role of self-compassion

Previous interventions have shown that mindfulness treatment can promote mental health, suggesting that mindfulness-targeted treatment is most useful in epidemics or crises. Individuals’ level of self-compassion is related to their mental health. Individuals with high levels of self-compassion will improve their defense mechanisms and be better at motivating their positive behavior (Pace et al., 2009). Based on previous studies, this research illustrated the mediating effect of self-compassion on dispositional mindfulness toward mental health. It confirmed the protective role of individual self-compassion and dispositional mindfulness on mental health during the COVID-19 lockdown. Therefore, self-compassion training may be a useful intervention strategy for maintaining mental health. According to our findings, self-compassion improves subjective well-being, is associated with higher life satisfaction, and reduces symptoms of depression and anxiety (Bluth and Blanton, 2015), providing an optimistic link to subjective well-being (Baer et al., 2012). Our findings add to the growing body of evidence that self-compassion mediates the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and mental health (Voci et al., 2019), and that increased self-compassion can help to demonstrate the role of mindfulness in mental health. In other words, self-compassion, consistent with our hypothesis, is an important mechanism explaining why and how mindfulness is associated with better mental health, and self-compassion plays an important role in mental health protection (Neff and Pommier, 2013). Students with a high degree of self-compassion will improve their defense mechanisms, motivate positive behaviors (Pace et al., 2009) and adopt a more positive coping style (Leary et al., 2007) when faced with the lockdown. College students with high levels of self-compassion tend to confront their shortcomings with friendliness and warmth, and it may improve an individual’s subjective well-being (Hollis-Walker and Colosimo, 2011). They also understand negative life events more objectively and use positive coping strategies to reduce anxiety and depression (Van Dam et al., 2011; Neff et al., 2018). College students with low self-compassion will be overly immersed in coronavirus-induced stress due to their numbness and loneliness associated with criticism, depression, anxiety, and other negative psychological symptoms (Van Dam et al., 2011), leading to increased unhappiness and negative psychological symptoms.

Overall, our findings confirm our predictions. Individuals with dispositional mindfulness have a higher degree of self-compassion and tend to have higher subject well-being (Schutte and Malouff, 2011; Chen et al., 2017; Liang et al., 2022), but it is negatively related to anxiety and depression (Dillard and Meier, 2021). As expected, self-compassion mediated the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and well-being. Whether or not college students meditate, the mechanisms between dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion, and subjective well-being were equally significant. This suggests that dispositional mindfulness results from a complex interaction between explicit mindfulness training, genetic predisposition, and the environment in which personality develops (Brown et al., 2007). According to the study, people with high dispositional mindfulness scores included both meditators and non-meditators (whose dispositional mindfulness is genetically inherited). Individuals born with dispositional mindfulness may have better mental health, and self-compassion training is more likely to improve their mental health during COVID-19. Another group of college students born with less dispositional mindfulness may benefit from mindfulness and self-compassion training together, such as mindfulness self-compassion programs of the second generation mindfulness intervention.

6.3. The moderating role of gender

It is well known that males and females have different mental health problems. Females tend to have more internalizing disorders than males and a higher prevalence of depression and anxiety (Rosenfield and Mouzon, 2013). There is no doubt that females are more likely to experience mental distress during the COVID-19 lockdown. To begin, our research found that gender has a moderating effect on the relationship between mindfulness and well-being and depression and anxiety in college students. Female college students are more socially sensitive than males and are more likely to contemplate a coping strategy, which leads to increased mental health symptoms (Neff, 2003b; Yuan et al., 2010; Van Droogenbroeck et al., 2018). In other words, female college students have a stronger negative correlation between dispositional mindfulness and psychological symptoms of anxiety and depression and a weaker positive correlation with well-being (Webb et al., 2021a,b). Females are more likely to experience mental distress due to the uncertainty of the epidemic, infection risk, and various stresses and shocks. Their dispositional mindfulness increases more slowly than male college students, as does their well-being. Therefore, during the COVID-19 lockdown, females with low dispositional mindfulness warrant more attention, support, and protection in the mental health education and maintenance of college students. Second, the study also found that gender plays a moderating role in the relationship between dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion in college students. With the increase in dispositional mindfulness, college students’ self-compassion will increase, but that of female students will increase more slowly than male college students; that is, when the COVID-19 lockdown brings life and psychological discomfort, female students are more prone to self-criticism and being isolated. Males have greater self-compassion and common humanity, and they recover faster. That is, gender not only modifies college student attitudes toward mindfulness and self-compassion, but it also modifies the relationship between self-compassion and mental health. Compared to the protective effects of self-compassion on the mental health of male college students, the increase in well-being in female college students is slower, and the decrease in anxiety and depression is slighter during the increase in self-compassion.

7. Limitations and future directions

Although we have conducted a comprehensive study of the correlation between dispositional mindfulness and mental health, some shortcomings remain. First of all, this study adopts a cross-sectional study design, and experimental studies or longitudinal studies with more causal inferential power are needed to investigate the causal relationship further. Second, limited by the research funding, this study failed to analyze a sample across the country. Only selected students from a university in one city were recruited as a research sample. This limits the generalization of the results to some extent; future studies can be conducted on a larger scale to improve the application of the findings. Because this study was conducted among Chinese college students, extrapolating our findings to other age groups or populations in different countries may pose several challenges. Furthermore, no participants with a diagnosed psychiatric disorder were recruited for the current study. Therefore, the results can only be generalized to other community samples. More research should test a moderated mediation model in more diverse samples. Third, the disproportionate gender composition, with more females than males in the sample, may confound the correlation we examined. Furthermore, mindfulness is not the only reason for mental health. Future research could incorporate multiple factors to protect college students during the COVID-19 lockdown.

8. Conclusion

Despite these limitations, the current study sheds light on how and in what state mindfulness is related to mental health during COVID-19 Lockdowns and may help inform intervention strategies to reduce depression and anxiety. First, our findings indicate that increasing dispositional mindfulness in college students during lockdown could effectively reduce anxiety and depression while also improving subjective well-being. Numerous studies have found that the university provides online or offline programs such as mindfulness-based stress reduction, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, dialectical behavior therapy, acceptance and attachment therapy, and others that can help college students develop and improve their dispositional mindfulness. Then, dispositional mindfulness can alleviate anxiety and depression and protect well-being through self-compassion. The self-compassion intervention may have a better intervention effect in people with high scores for dispositional mindfulness. For those with natural dispositional mindfulness, self-compassion training may be more appropriate to improve their mental health. Other college students can improve their mental health by practicing mindfulness and self-compassion together. Third, gender influences mindfulness, self-compassion, and mental health. For female college students, improving dispositional mindfulness is particularly important for improving self-compassion and mental health. Therefore, strengthening dispositional mindfulness and self-compassion interventions for females is a reliable treatment to alleviate symptoms of anxiety and depression and protect the subject’s well-being during the COVID-19 lockdown.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee for Psychological Research of the corresponding author’s institution. Written informed consent from the participants was not required in accordance with the national legislation and institutional requirements.

Author contributions

DZ: methodology, formal analysis, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, and investigation. JS: translation, polishing, revised validation, and supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Research Program Funds of the Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment toward Basic Education Quality (2021–04–014-BZPK01), Open Project of Key Laboratory of Adolescent Cyberpsychology and Behavior (Central China Normal University), Hubei Province Key Laboratory of Human Development and Mental Health Ministry of Education (2019B07), and Self-Determined Research Funds of Central China Normal University from the Colleges Basic Research and Operation of Ministry of Education (CCNU19TS076).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

We special thanks to Chuanhua Gu and Huashan Liu from Central China Normal University for the helps in revising the manuscript.

References

  1. Ahmed M. Z., Ahmed O., Aibao Z., Hanbin S., Siyu L., Ahmad A. (2020). Epidemic of COVID-19 in China and associated psychological problems. Asian J. Psychiatr. 51:102092. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102092, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. [Google Scholar]
  3. Baer R. A., Lykins E. L. B., Peters J. R. (2012). Mindfulness and self-compassion as predictors of psychological wellbeing in long-term meditators and matched nonmeditators. J. Posit. Psychol. 7, 230–238. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2012.674548 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Baer R. A., Smith G. T., Hopkins J., Krietemeyer J., Toney L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment 13, 27–45. doi: 10.1177/1073191105283504, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bajaj B., Gupta R., Pande N. (2016). Self-esteem mediates the relationship between mindfulness and well-being. Pers. Individ. Dif. 94, 96–100. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.01.020 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Batchelor S. (1994). The Awakening of the West: The Encounter of Buddhism and Western Culture. United States: Aquarian. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bergomi C., Tschacher W., Kupper Z. (2015). Meditation practice and self-reported mindfulness: a cross-sectional investigation of meditators and non-meditators using the comprehensive inventory of mindfulness experiences (CHIME). Mindfulness 6, 1411–1421. doi: 10.1007/s12671-015-0415-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bluth K., Blanton P. W. (2015). The influence of self-compassion on emotional well-being among early and older adolescent males and females. J. Posit. Psychol. 10, 219–230. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.936967, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bluth K., Campo R. A., Futch W. S., Gaylord S. A. (2017). Age and gender differences in the associations of self-compassion and emotional well-being in a large adolescent sample. J. Youth Adolesc. 46, 840–853. doi: 10.1007/s10964-016-0567-2, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bodhi B. (2011). What does mindfulness really mean? A canonical perspective. Contemp. Buddhism 12, 19–39. doi: 10.1080/14639947.2011.564813 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Bohlmeijer E., Ten Klooster P. M., Fledderus M., Veehof M., Baer R. (2011). Psychometric properties of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in depressed adults and development of a short form. Assessment 18, 308–320. doi: 10.1177/1073191111408231, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown K. W., Ryan R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84, 822–848. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Brown K. W., Ryan R. M., Creswell J. D. (2007). Mindfulness: theoretical foundations and evidence for its salutary effects. Psychol. Inq. 18, 211–237. doi: 10.1080/10478400701598298 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Cao W., Fang Z., Hou G., Han M., Xu X., Dong J., et al. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Res. 287:112934. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Carlucci L., D’Ambrosio I., Balsamo M. (2020). Demographic and attitudinal factors of adherence to quarantine guidelines during COVID-19: the Italian model. Front. Psychol. 11:559288. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.559288, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Chang J. J., Ji Y., Li Y. H., Pan H. F., Su P. Y. (2021). Prevalence of anxiety symptom and depressive symptom among college students during COVID-19 pandemic: a meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 292, 242–254. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.05.109, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Chen L. H., Wu C. H., Chang J. H. (2017). Gratitude and athletes’ life satisfaction: the moderating role of mindfulness. J. Happiness Stud. 18, 1147–1159. doi: 10.1007/s10902-016-9764-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Chiesa A. (2013). The difficulty of defining mindfulness: current thought and critical issues. Mindfulness 4, 255–268. doi: 10.1007/s12671-012-0123-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Chu C. S., Stubbs B., Chen T. Y., Tang C. H., Li D. J., Yang W. C., et al. (2018). The effectiveness of adjunct mindfulness-based intervention in treatment of bipolar disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 225, 234–245. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.08.025, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Conversano C., Marchi L., Miniati M. (2020). Psychological distress among healthcare professionals involved in the COVID-19 emergency: vulnerability and resilience factors. Clin. Neuropsychiatry 17, 94–96. doi: 10.36131/CN20200212, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Cooke R., Bewick B. M., Barkham M., Bradley M., Audin K. (2006). Measuring, monitoring and managing the psychological well-being of first year university students. Br. J. Guid. Couns. 34, 505–517. doi: 10.1080/03069880600942624 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Copeland W., Shanahan L., Costello E. J., Angold A. (2011). Cumulative prevalence of psychiatric disorders by young adulthood: a prospective cohort analysis from the Great Smoky Mountains study. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 50, 252–261. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.12.014, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Cowen E. L. (1994). The enhancement of psychological wellness: Challenges and opportunities. Am. J. Community Psychol. 22:149179. doi: 10.1007/BF02506861 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Demirdogen E. S., Orak I., Cansever O. M., Warikoo N., Yavuz M. (2022). The associations between metacognition problems, mindfulness, and internalizing symptoms in university students quarantined due to COVID-19 in Turkey. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care 58, 560–567. doi: 10.1111/ppc.13027, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Dettmann L. M., Adams S., Taylor G. (2022). Investigating the prevalence of anxiety and depression during the first COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom: systematic review and meta-analyses. Br. J. Clin. Psychol. 61, 757–780. doi: 10.1111/bjc.12360, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Diener E., Emmons R. A., Larsen R. J., Griffin S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. J. Pers. Assess. 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Dillard A. J., Meier B. P. (2021). Trait mindfulness is negatively associated with distress related to COVID-19. Pers. Individ. Dif. 179:110955. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.110955, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Dixon H. C., Overall N. C. (2016). Dispositional mindfulness attenuates the link between daily stress and depressed mood. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 35, 255–268. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2016.35.3.255 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Dodd R. H., Dadaczynski K., Okan O., McCaffery K. J., Pickles K. (2021). Psychological wellbeing and academic experience of university students in Australia during COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18:866. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18030866, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Duarte J., Pinto-Gouveia J. (2017). Mindfulness, self-compassion and psychological inflexibility mediate the effects of a mindfulness-based intervention in a sample of oncology nurses. J. Contextual Behav. Sci. 6, 125–133. doi: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2017.03.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Eklund K., Dowdy E., Jones C., Furlong M. (2010). Applicability of the dual-factor model of mental health for college students. J. College Stud. Psychother. 25, 79–92. doi: 10.1080/87568225.2011.532677 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Galla B. M. (2016). Within-person changes in mindfulness and self-compassion predict enhanced emotional well-being in healthy, but stressed adolescents. J. Adolesc. 49, 204–217. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.03.016, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Gerace A. (2022). Gentle gloves: the importance of self-compassion for mental health nurses during COVID-19. Int. J. Ment. Health Nurs. 31, 3–7. doi: 10.1111/inm.12934, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Gethin R. (1992/2001). The Buddhist Path to Awakening: A Study of the Bodhi-Pakkhiya Dhamma. United Kingdom: Oneworld Publications, 382–392. [Google Scholar]
  35. Goldberg S. B., Riordan K. M., Sun S., Davidson R. J. (2022). The empirical status of mindfulness-based interventions: a systematic review of 44 meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 17, 108–130. doi: 10.1177/1745691620968771, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Goldstein J. (2002). One Dharma: The Emerging Western Buddhism. United States: Harper Collins. [Google Scholar]
  37. González-García M., Álvarez J. C., Pérez E. Z., Fernandez-Carriba S., López J. G. (2021). Feasibility of a brief online mindfulness and compassion-based intervention to promote mental health among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mindfulness 12, 1685–1695. doi: 10.1007/s12671-021-01632-6, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Good D. J., Lyddy C. J., Glomb T. M., Bono J. E., Brown K. W., Duffy M. K., et al. (2016). Contemplating mindfulness at work: an integrative review. J. Manage. 42, 114–142. doi: 10.1177/0149206315617003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Greenspoon P. J., Saklofske D. H. (2001). Toward an integration of subjective well-being and psychopathology. Soc. Indic. Res. 54, 81–108. doi: 10.1023/A:1007219227883 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Hall R. C., Hall R. C., Chapman M. J. (2008). The 1995 Kikwit Ebola outbreak: lessons hospitals and physicians can apply to future viral epidemics. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatry 30, 446–452. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2008.05.003, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Hayes A.F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. J. Educ. Meas. 51, 335–337. [Google Scholar]
  42. Hides L., Quinn C., Stoyanov S., Cockshaw W., Kavanagh D. J., Shochet I., et al. (2020). Testing the interrelationship between mental well-being and mental distress in young people. J. Posit. Psychol. 15, 314–324. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2019.1610478 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Hollis-Walker L., Colosimo K. (2011). Mindfulness, self-compassion, and happiness in non-meditators: a theoretical and empirical examination. Pers. Individ. Dif. 50, 222–227. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.033 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Homan K. J. (2016). Self-compassion and psychological well-being in older adults. J. Adult Dev. 23, 111–119. doi: 10.1007/s10804-016-9227-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Huang C. C., Chen Y., Cheung S., Hu H., Wang E. (2021a). Adverse childhood experiences, mindfulness and happiness in Chinese college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Child Fam. Soc. Work 26, 677–686. doi: 10.1111/cfs.12848, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Huang L., Chen Z., Jiang W., Wang Y., Fang X., Han H., et al. (2021). Reliability and validity test of chinese version of self-care scale for adolescents (SCS-Y). In Abstracts of the 23rd National Conference on Psychology (Part II), 663–664. [Google Scholar]
  47. Huang C. C., Yang M. F., Geng Y., Chen Y. F., Cheung S. P., Deng G. S., et al. (2021b). Adverse childhood experiences and mindfulness in Chinese college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Psych. 12:619128. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.619128, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Huang Y., Zhao N. (2020). Generalized anxiety disorder, depressive symptoms and sleep quality during COVID-19 outbreak in China: a web-based cross-sectional survey. Psychiatry Res. 288:112954. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112954, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Huppert F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regarding its causes and consequences. Appl. Psychol. Health Well-Being 1, 137–164. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01008.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Kabat-Zinn J. (1994). Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life. New York: Hyperion press. [Google Scholar]
  51. Kabat-Zinn J. (2000). “Indra's net at work: the mainstreaming of Dharma practice in society” in The Psychology of Awakening: Buddhism, Science, and Our Day-to-Day Lives. eds. Watson G., Batchelor S., Claxton G. (New York: Samuel Weiser; ), 225–249. [Google Scholar]
  52. Lam A. H. Y., Leung S. F., Lin J. J., Chien W. T. (2020). The effectiveness of a mindfulness-based psychoeducation programme for emotional regulation in individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a pilot randomised controlled trial. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 16, 729–747. doi: 10.2147/ndt.S231877, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Lama D., Cutler H.C. (1998). The Art of Happiness: A Handbook for Living. United States: Riverhead Books press. [Google Scholar]
  54. Leary M. R., Tate E. B., Adams C. E., Allen A. B., Hancock J. (2007). Self-compassion and reactions to unpleasant self-relevant events: the implications of treating oneself kindly. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 92, 887–904. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.887, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Liang S., Dong M., Zhao H., Song Y., Yang A. (2022). Mindfulness and life satisfaction: the moderating effect of self-control and the moderated moderating effect of resilience. Pers. Individ. Dif. 185:111241. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.111241 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Liu C. H., Stevens C., Wong S. H. M., Yasui M., Chen J. A. (2019). The prevalence and predictors of mental health diagnoses and suicide among U.S. college students: implications for addressing disparities in service use. Depress. Anxiety 36, 8–17. doi: 10.1002/da.22830, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. López A., Sanderman R., Ranchor A. V., Schroevers M. J. (2018). Compassion for others and self-compassion: levels, correlates, and relationship with psychological well-being. Mindfulness 9, 325–331. doi: 10.1007/s12671-017-0777-z, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Luykx J. J., Vinkers C. H., Tijdink J. K. (2020). Psychiatry in times of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: an imperative for psychiatrists to act now. JAMA Psychiat. 77, 1097–1098. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.1225 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. MacKenzie S. B., Podsakoff P. M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing: causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. J. Retail. 88, 542–555. doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Mazza C., Ricci E., Biondi S., Colasanti M., Ferracuti S., Napoli C., et al. (2020). A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Italian people during the COVID-19 pandemic: immediate psychological responses and associated factors. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17:3165. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17093165, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Merrell K. W. (2008). Helping students overcome depression and anxiety: a practical guide. 2nd Edn. United States: Guilford press. [Google Scholar]
  62. Mucci F., Mucci N., Diolaiuti F. (2020). Lockdown and isolation: psychological aspects of COVID-19 pandemic in the general population. Clin. Neuropsychiatry 17, 63–64. doi: 10.36131/cn20200205, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Neff K. D. (2003a). Self-compassion: an alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude toward oneself. Self Identity 2, 85–101. doi: 10.1080/15298860309032 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Neff K. D. (2003b). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self Identity 2, 223–250. doi: 10.1080/15298860309027 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Neff K. D. (2009). The role of self-compassion in development: a healthier way to relate to oneself. Hum. Dev. 52, 211–214. doi: 10.1159/000215071, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Neff K. D., Long P., Knox M. C., Davidson O., Kuchar A., Costigan A., et al. (2018). The forest and the trees: examining the association of self-compassion and its positive and negative components with psychological functioning. Self Identity 17, 627–645. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2018.1436587 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  67. Neff K. D., Pommier E. (2013). The relationship between self-compassion and other-focused concern among college undergraduates, community adults, and practicing meditators. Self Identity 12, 160–176. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2011.649546 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  68. Nyklíček I., Schoormans D., Zijlstra W. P. (2011). Authors’ reply to response to "mindfulness and psychological well-being: are they related to type of meditation technique practiced?". J. Altern. Complement. Med. 17, 1101–1102. doi: 10.1089/acm.2011.0642, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Otu A., Charles C. H., Yaya S. (2020). Mental health and psychosocial well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: the invisible elephant in the room. Int. J. Ment. Health Syst. 14:38. doi: 10.1186/s13033-020-00371-w, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Pace T. W., Negi L. T., Adame D. D., Cole S. P., Sivilli T. I., Brown T. D., et al. (2009). Effect of compassion meditation on neuroendocrine, innate immune and behavioral responses to psychosocial stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology 34, 87–98. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2008.08.011, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Pavot W., Diener E. (2008). The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. J. Posit. Psychol. 3, 137–152. doi: 10.1080/17439760701756946 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  72. Ramadan M., Fallatah A. M., Batwa Y. F., Saifaddin Z., Mirza M. S., Aldabbagh M., et al. (2022). Trends in emergency department visits for mental health disorder diagnoses before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a retrospective cohort study 2018–2021. BMC Psychiatry 22:378. doi: 10.1186/s12888-022-03988-y, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Rosenfield S., Mouzon D. (2013). “Gender and mental health” in Handbook of the Sociology of Mental Health. eds. Aneshensel C. S., Phelan J. C., Bierman A. (Dordrecht: Springer; ), 277–296. [Google Scholar]
  74. Ryff C. D., Keyes C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 719–727. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Schutte N. S., Malouff J. M. (2011). Emotional intelligence mediates the relationship between mindfulness and subjective well-being. Pers. Individ. Dif. 50, 1116–1119. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.037 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  76. Sedlmeier P., Eberth J., Schwarz M., Zimmermann D., Haarig F., Jaeger S., et al. (2012). The psychological effects of meditation: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 138, 1139–1171. doi: 10.1037/a0028168 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Shapiro S. L., Carlson L. E., Astin J. A., Freedman B. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness. J. Clin. Psychol. 62, 373–386. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20237 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Soler J., Cebolla A., Feliu-Soler A., Demarzo M. M., Pascual J. C., Baйos R., et al. (2014). Relationship between meditative practice and self-reported mindfulness: the MINDSENS composite index. PLoS One 9:e86622. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086622, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Strauss C., Cavanagh K., Oliver A., Pettman D. (2014). Mindfulness-based interventions for people diagnosed with a current episode of an anxiety or depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. PLoS One 9:e96110. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096110, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Tosevski D. L., Milovancevic M. P., Gajic S. D. (2010). Personality and psychopathology of university students. Curr. Opin. Psychiatry 23, 48–52. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e328333d625 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Tran M. A. Q., Vo-Thanh T., Soliman M., Ha A. T., Van Pham M. (2022). Could mindfulness diminish mental health disorders? The serial mediating role of self-compassion and psychological well-being. Curr. Psychol. 1–14. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03421-3, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Van Dam N. T., Sheppard S. C., Forsyth J. P., Earleywine M. (2011). Self-compassion is a better predictor than mindfulness of symptom severity and quality of life in mixed anxiety and depression. J. Anxiety Disord. 25, 123–130. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.08.011, PMID: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Van Droogenbroeck F., Spruyt B., Keppens G. (2018). Gender differences in mental health problems among adolescents and the role of social support: results from the Belgian health interview surveys 2008 and 2013. BMC Psychiatry 18:6. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1591-4, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Voci A., Veneziani C. A., Fuochi G. (2019). Relating mindfulness, heartfulness, and psychological well-being: the role of self-compassion and gratitude. Mindfulness 10, 339–351. doi: 10.1007/s12671-018-0978-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  85. Wang D., Chen H., Zhai S., Zhu Z., Huang S., Zhou X., et al. (2021). Is returning to school during the COVID-19 pandemic stressful? A study on immediate mental health status of Chinese college students. J. Affect. Disord. 287, 261–267. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.03.035, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Wang W., Chopel T. (2020). Mindfulness and gender: a pilot quantitative study. Issues Inform. Syst. 18, 105–115. doi: 10.48009/4_iis_2017_105-115 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  87. Wang C., Pan R., Wan X., Tan Y., Xu L., Ho C. S., et al. (2020). Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 17:1729. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051729, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Wang X., Qian X., Zhang D., Liu M., Psychology S. O. (2016). The applicability of the dual-factor model of mental health in Chinese college students and its psychological suzhi: an empirical investigation. J. Psychol. Sci. 6, 1296–1301. doi: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20160603 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  89. Wang C., Zhao H. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on anxiety in Chinese university students. Front. Psychol. 11:1168. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01168, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Webb L., Musci R., Mendelson T. (2021a). Co-occurring mental health symptoms in urban adolescents: comorbidity profiles and correlates. J. Clin. Child Adolesc. Psychol. 1–13, 1–13. doi: 10.1080/15374416.2021.1901228, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Webb L., Sibinga E., Musci R., Clary L. K., Mendelson T. (2021b). Confirming profiles of comorbid psychological symptoms in urban youth: exploring gender differences and trait mindfulness. J. Youth Adolesc. 50, 2249–2261. doi: 10.1007/s10964-021-01509-w, PMID: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. World Health Organization (2020). Mental health and psychosocial considerations during the COVID-19 outbreak. World Health Organization, 1-6.
  93. Yuan J. J., Wang Y., Ju E. X., Li H. (2010). Gender differences in emotional processing and its neural mechanisms. Adv. Psychol. Sci. 18:1899. [Google Scholar]
  94. Zigmond A. S., Snaith R. P. (1983). The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr. Scand. 67, 361–370. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Articles from Frontiers in Psychology are provided here courtesy of Frontiers Media SA

RESOURCES