Could Well-Being be a Mechanism of Intentional Growth Training’s Effect on Depressive Symptoms? Kevin A. Harmon, MA, Andrew K. Littlefield, PhD, Christine Robitschek, PhD, Dominika Borowa, MA, & Laurie Pascual, MA TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY Department of Psychology Abstract Aim: Assess the mechanism of action of Intentional Growth Training (IGT)1 as a protective factor for depression. It was hypothesized that hedonic well-being (i.e., life satisfaction and subjective happiness) would mediate the relationship between IGT and depression. Method: 86 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to control or treatment. Treatment participants received IGT. The control group did not. Results: After four weeks, depressive symptoms for the treatment group decreased while depressive symptoms for the control group increased. Life satisfaction significantly mediated the effect of condition on depression. Method Participants N = 86 undergraduate students (74.2% female) at a large, public Southwestern university Age: M = 18.94, SD = 2.22, Range = 15-46 Ethnicity: Primarily White/Caucasian (65.8%) Materials CES-D (Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale)7 SHS (Subjective Happiness Scale)8 SWLS (Satisfaction with Life Scale)9 Demographic Questionnaire Intervention IGT (Intentional Growth Training)1 is a brief intervention designed to teach PGI skills. Participants learn about PGI and its benefits, and complete a personal growth goal the week following the intervention. Participants meet after a week to discuss their experiences with this goal. Procedure Participants randomly assigned to treatment or control. At Time 1, both groups completed the questionnaires listed above. Treatment received part 1 of IGT. At Time 2 (one week after Time 1), both groups completed the questionnaires listed above. Treatment received part 2 of IGT. At Time 3 (three weeks after Time 1), participants from both conditions completed an online survey containing the same measures. Discussion Further evidence that IGT serves as a protective factor for depressive symptoms. IGT may improve life satisfaction; this may mediate IGT’s effect on depressive symptoms. Replication over longer time periods needed. Replication in a depressed sample is in the works. Future studies should also examine other potential mechanisms of IGT’s effect on depressive symptoms. Introduction 10% of adults in the U.S. suffer from depression2. One vulnerable group is college students, with 15% to 20% of students diagnosed with depression3. Depression is associated with impaired well-being; this impairment can increase the chance of another depressive episode. There is a need to identify interventions that may improve well-being to prevent depressive symptoms4. Intentional Growth Training (IGT) 1 – has acted as a buffer against the development and exacerbation of depressive symptoms5 This study aims to assess the effect of IGT as a protective factor against the development of depression by increasing hedonic well-being in college students. IGT is an intervention that teaches participants Personal Growth Initiative (PGI) skills, which is a person’s intentional positive change in ways that are cognitive, behavioral, or affective6. Main hypothesis: Receiving IGT will predict fewer depressive symptoms in college students at a one-month follow up compared to control. This relationship will be mediated by hedonic well-being. References: Thoen, M. A., & Robitschek, C. (2013). Intentional Growth Training: Developing an intervention to increase Personal Growth Initiative. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 5, 149–170. doi:10.1111/aphw.12001 Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011). Current depression among adults – United States, 2006 and 2008. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 59 (38). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsdepression/revised_table_estimates_for_depression_mmw r_erratum_feb-2011.pdf Dobson, K.S. (1989). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of cognitive therapy for depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57(3), 414-419. Fava, G. A., & Ruini, C. (2003). Development and characteristics of a well-being enhancing psychotherapeutic strategy: Well-being therapy. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34(1), 45-63. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7916(03)00019-3 Borowa, D., Sirles, D., Ciavaglia, A., Glogau, M., Becerra, A., Robitschek, C. (2013) Protecting college students against depression: Effects of intentional growth initiative. Unpublished manuscript Robitschek, C., Ashton, M. W., Spering, C. C., Geiger, N., Byers, D., Schotts, G. C., & Thoen, M. (2012). Development and psychometric properties of the Personal Growth Initiative Scale – II. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 274-287. doi: 10.1037/a0027310 Radloff, L.S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social indicators research, 46(2), 137-155. Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of personality assessment, 49(1), 71-75. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis. Routledge. Results Means and Standard Deviations of Measures at Baseline, Week 1, and Week 4 Repeated-measures Analysis, using SAS Figure 1 PROC MIXED showed differential changes Mediation Model as a function of condition in depressive symptoms, F(2, 84) = 7.22, p < .01, and life satisfaction, F(2, 84) = 5.40 p < .01, but not subjective happiness. A mediation model following MacKinnon’s10 approach, found that change in life satisfaction between baseline and week 1 mediated the effect of condition on change in depression in the same interval, (indirect effect = -.08, 95% CI = -.15, -.02). Table 1 Measure Baseline Week 1 Week 4 Treatment n = 43 CES-D M = 11.19, SD = 7.71 M = 8.34, SD = 8.19 M = 8.28, SD = 6.52 Control M = 9.70, SD = 4.69 M = 12.17, SD = 8.77 M = 12.72, SD = 10.72 SWLS M = 25.98, SD = 6.19 M = 28.11, SD = 5.83 M = 28.00, SD = 5.50 M = 26.05, SD = 6.05 M = 25.40, SD = 6.54 M = 26.32, SD = 6.93 SHS M = 5.35, SD = 1.05 M = 5.62, SD = 1.14 M = 5.55, SD = 0.94 M = 5.23, SD = 1.19 M = 5.21, SD = 1.26 M = 5.22, SD = 1.41 Questions? For more information contact Kevin Harmon at: Department of Psychology Texas Tech University PO Box 42051 Lubbock, TX 79409-2051 Email: kevin.a.harmon@ttu.edu