1

School of Psychology, Arden University

BSc. Psychology

PSY6012D: Research Project

The Impact of Mindfulness on Stress Reduction and Mental Well-Being Among

University Students

STU121185

Miss Rabiya Rasheed

10541
 2

Declaration & Statement Page

I declare that the work presented for assessment in this dissertation is my own, that it

has not previously been presented for another assessment, and that my debts (for

words, data, arguments, and ideas) have been appropriately acknowledged.

I consent to Arden University’s free use online reproduction, electronically, and including

adaptation for teaching and education activities of any whole or part item of this dissertation.

Date: 23rd October 2024

Noor Imran
 3

Acknowledgments

With all my heart, I would like to thank my family, and my incredible husband for all their

support, encouragement, and patience throughout this journey. Their faith in me has been a

huge source of strength for me. I’m also extremely grateful to my teachers and supervisors.

Their insights and guidance really helped me bring out the best from this study. Especially,

for giving me their valuable time whenever I needed their help. Finally, I want to give a

special thanks to my amazing friend, who motivated me the most. Her friendship and support

really kept me calm and working hard. I could not have done this without her help.

Thank you everyone for being such an important part of this project.
 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration & Statement Page ................................................................................................ 2

Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................... 3

Abstract .................................................................................................................................... 9

The Impact of Mindfulness on Stress Reduction and Mental Well-Being Among University

Students ................................................................................................................................. 10

Mindfulness, Stress, and Mental Well-Being...................................................................... 10

Mindfulness Theories and Models ..................................................................................... 12

Literature Review ............................................................................................................... 13

General Impact of Mindfulness ....................................................................................... 13

Stress and Mental Well-Being Among University Students ............................................ 14

Gender differences, Culture, and Mindfulness ............................................................... 16

Novelty and Gaps ........................................................................................................... 18

Present Study ..................................................................................................................... 18

Methods ................................................................................................................................. 19

Participants ........................................................................................................................ 20

Design ................................................................................................................................ 21

Materials ............................................................................................................................. 22

Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) ........................................................... 22

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) ........................................................................................ 23

Mental Health Continuum short form (MHC-sf) .............................................................. 24

Procedure ........................................................................................................................... 25

Results ................................................................................................................................... 26

Participants and Grouping.................................................................................................. 26

Descriptive Information ...................................................................................................... 27

Group A (Participants who engaged in mindfulness) ..................................................... 27

Mindfulness Scores ........................................................................................................ 27

Stress Scores ................................................................................................................. 27

 5

Mental Well-Being Scores .............................................................................................. 28

Group B: Participants who did not practice mindfulness ................................................ 28

Mindfulness Scores ........................................................................................................ 28

Stress Scores ................................................................................................................. 28

Mental Well-Being Scores .............................................................................................. 28

Justification for Chosen Analyses ...................................................................................... 29

Tests for Normality ............................................................................................................. 29

Non-Parametric Tests ........................................................................................................ 31

Spearman’s Correlation Test ............................................................................................. 31

Summary of Key Findings .................................................................................................. 32

Discussion ............................................................................................................................. 32

Summary of Findings ......................................................................................................... 32

Research Question and Hypothesis................................................................................... 33

Interpretation of Findings ................................................................................................... 34

Mindfulness and Stress Reduction ..................................................................................... 34

Mindfulness and Mental Well-Being ................................................................................... 35

Gender differences ............................................................................................................. 36

Psychological Theory and Research Integration................................................................ 36

Theoretical and Practical Implications................................................................................ 37

Limitations .......................................................................................................................... 39

Recommendations for Future Research ............................................................................ 40

References ............................................................................................................................ 43

Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 50

Appendix A: Psychometric Tests ....................................................................................... 50

Table 1 ............................................................................................................................... 50

Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) .............................................................. 50

Table 2 ............................................................................................................................... 52

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) ........................................................................................... 52

 6

Table 3 ............................................................................................................................... 53

Mental Health Continuum short form (MHC-SF) ................................................................ 53

Appendix B: SPSS Outputs................................................................................................ 54

Table 1 ............................................................................................................................... 54

Descriptive statistics from SPSS for mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being of Group A

........................................................................................................................................... 54

Table 2 ............................................................................................................................... 55

Descriptive statistics from SPSS for mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being of Group B

........................................................................................................................................... 55

Figure 1 .............................................................................................................................. 56

Q-Q Plots for Mindfulness (Group A) ................................................................................. 56

Figure 2 .............................................................................................................................. 57

Q-Q Plots for Stress (Group A) .......................................................................................... 57

Figure 3 .............................................................................................................................. 57

Q-Q Plots for Mental Well-Being (Group A) ....................................................................... 57

Figure 4 .............................................................................................................................. 58

Q-Q Plots for Mindfulness (Group B) ................................................................................. 58

Figure 5 .............................................................................................................................. 59

Q-Q Plots for Stress (Group B) .......................................................................................... 59

Figure 6 .............................................................................................................................. 59

Q-Q Plots for Mental Well-Being (Group B) ....................................................................... 59

Table 3 ............................................................................................................................... 60

Tests of Normality (Group A) ............................................................................................. 60

Table 4 ............................................................................................................................... 60

Tests of Normality (Group B) ............................................................................................. 60

Table 5 ............................................................................................................................... 60

Mann – Whitney U Test ...................................................................................................... 60

Table 6 ............................................................................................................................... 60
 7

Kruskal – Wallis Test .......................................................................................................... 60

Table 7 ............................................................................................................................... 61

Spearman’s Correlation Test ............................................................................................. 61

 8

The Impact of Mindfulness on Stress Reduction and Mental Well-Being Among

University Students

Noor Imran

BSc. Psychology, Arden University

PSY6012D: Research Project

Supervisor: Rabiya Rasheed

October 23, 2024

 9

Abstract

A growing amount of research is supporting the advantages of mindfulness training for both

mental and physical health. There has been an upsurge in the number of mental health

challenges among university students. In response to this growing concern, the current study

aimed to explore the impact of mindfulness on stress reduction and mental well-being

among university students. Prior research on mindfulness has mainly been conducted using

qualitative research design. This research utilizes a quantitative design to uncover deeper

correlations between these variables. It was hypothesized that mindfulness is likely to have a

negative relationship with stress and a positive relationship with mental well-being. The

study included 199 participants aged between 18 and 25, comprising 99 males and 100

females from IVY College of Management Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan, a unique geographic

location for research on mindfulness. The participants completed three questionnaires: 1)

Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scales (MAAS) 2) Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), and 3)

Mental Health Continuum short form [MHC (sf)]. The results from the statistical analysis

were in line with the hypothesis. Students who scored higher in mindfulness also scored high

in mental well-being. Their stress scores were also low compared to students who scored

less in MAAS. This study adds to the body of knowledge regarding mindfulness, stress

reduction, and mental well-being among university students. Moreover, it provides insight

and an idea about effective interventions to enhance mental well-being and reduce stress

among undergraduates.

Keywords: Mindfulness, Stress Reduction, Mental well-being, University Students

 10

The Impact of Mindfulness on Stress Reduction and Mental Well-Being Among

University Students

Over the years interest in mental health among university students has received

increasing attention especially because challenging academic demands, pressure, and

responsibility and demographic transition court put students’ great strain. Cognitive

symptoms related to stress, anxiety and depressive disorders are common in university

students and can attenuate learning achievements and interpersonal relations, as well as

psychological well-being (Pedrelli et al., 2015). The inevitable stressors cumulating within

university life such as academic pressure, some financial burden, societal expectations, and

life transitional stress can foster a stressful environment that could tamper an individuals'

mental well-being (Keller, 2020). To these challenges, mindfulness has received attention as

a helpful prevention-focused intervention to improve mental well-being and prevent stress.

Mindfulness, as defined by Kabat-Zinn (2003), refers to the intentional act of the

directing of one’s focus towards the present while avoiding negative judgment on it, has

been found to elicit a range of beneficial outcomes in emotional regulation, managing stress,

and overall mental well-being. This increasing focus on mindfulness could be attributable to

the ability of mindfulness to prepare students with the common needful coping strategies for

comprehending the psychological challenges of the university life. Literature shows that

mindfulness practices can have a positive impact to students’ resilience, regulating

emotions, and coping mechanisms to mention but a few, should help make mindfulness one

of the key areas that need to be addressed when offering mental well-being interventions in

educational institutes (Regehr et al., 2013).

Mindfulness, Stress, and Mental Well-Being

High stress levels are a common feature of the modern university experience and

can have a negative influence on one's mental well-being (Bayram & Bilgel, 2008; Liu et al.,

2019; Ribeiro et al., 2018). Stress was described by Selye (1956) in two parts: a demand or

stressor is any event that requires an adjustment, while stress is the specific state that

occurs when a person is faced with a challenge that exceeds his/her ability to cope
 11

especially in those circumstances which consist of danger, limits on prediction, and limited

control over events (Koolhaas et al., 2011). Stress can be miscellaneous in nature due to

certain characteristics such as unpredictability and lack of control, often lead to adverse side

effects, for example, sleep disturbances, weakened immunity, and increased vulnerability to

psychological disorders (Cohen et al., 2007). Therefore, stress can become an important

factor that leads to deterioration of the student’s health, which makes proper stress

management the key concern of every student.

Conversely, the concept of mental health involves the positive functioning which

includes health, well-being, satisfaction with life, purpose in life, and resilience to stress (Ryff

& Singer, 2008). Prior literature reveals that the mental health is essential for students’

success and when students’ experience declined mental health, their adverse effects on

their academic achievements and university experiences are observed (Robotham & Julian,

2006). Beiser (1974) recalled three significant factors which are important for well-being:

negative affect, positive sense of involvement, and long-term satisfaction. Keller (2020)

postulated that positive mental health and well-being may more often be inversely

associated, therefore requiring the need for a variety of mental health interventions and more

specifically within students.

In the last couple of years, there is growing interest in adopting mindfulness

interventions specially within university context for reduction of stress and improvement of

mental well-being (Germer, 2004). Two examples of mindfulness-based interventions

(MBIs): Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) and Mindfulness Based Cognitive

Therapy (MBCT), have shown significantly positive results in improving the mental well-

being of students (Felver et al., 2018). These programs which include structured mindfulness

practices are used to promote current state recognition and emotional processing in

students, leading to improvement of their coping strategies (Shapiro et al., 2006).

The current study's literature review systematically evaluates prior literature on

mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being among university students. By reviewing the

existing literature and evaluating the previous research methods, sample characteristics, and
 12

limitations of specific studies, the present review will be able to show work that needs to be

done in the future, including the investigation of cultural and gender differences regarding

mindfulness in countries other than Western countries, such as Pakistan.

Mindfulness Theories and Models

Kabat-Zinn (2003) brought forward the MBSR program which has theoretical support

for the current form of mindfulness interventions. It is suggested that practicing mindfulness

helps to alleviate psychological issues and improve an individual’s quality of life, especially

university students. For instance, a study to describe the impact of MBSR on students was

conducted using a randomized control trial by Shapiro et al. (2008). The results showed that

participants who received MBSR demonstrated statistically significant increases in

mindfulness levels, decreased perceived stress, and improved general well-being compared

with subjects in the control group. However, there is a lack of external validity in the study

since the researchers have a small sample size of only 48 participants and the studied

construct were determined through self-report measures. In addition, no follow-up

assessment was administered to determine the maintenance of the mindfulness benefits

eight weeks post-intervention.

Likewise, Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) has shown effectiveness in

prevention of relapse in depression by combining MBSR with cognitive therapy by enabling

participants modify negative cognitive processes (Segal et al., 2002). Although MBCT

provides a solid theoretical framework, its potential may be population dependent. The

quantitative research by Alsubaie et al. (2017) revealed the positive effect of MBCT on

university students’ mental well-being results. However, self-report measures were used in

the study, hence the findings are likely to be influenced by social desirability bias. The

authors also found gaps that may indicate the importance of the longitudinal studies of

mindfulness interventions since such short-term results may not capture the long-term

impact of these practices.

Furthermore, according to Fredrickson (2004) broaden-and-build theory, “positive

emotional experiences robustly improve general well-being”. It argues that efforts to build
 13

positive emotions would count towards creating the resilience in humans that could lead to

improved coping of stress and improved mental well-being. This theory is commensurable

with the previous finding of mindfulness promoting emotional regulation and resilience, but

also raises questions about the context in which mindfulness practices may be effective. In

the same way, cultural differences in display of emotion and ways of handling the

communities’ situations may influence how people manage to experience and practice

mindfulness.

Literature Review

General Impact of Mindfulness

Many of the studies in the current body of knowledge emphasise that mindfulness

may have great positive effects in improving the state of mental health among university

students. Another study of meta-analytic reviews confirmed that mindfulness practice leads

to the decrease of the symptoms of anxiety, depression and stress and enhances the

general psychological well-being (Hölzel et al., 2011). Nevertheless, the given literature

poses methodological variations that are an issue in yielding concrete conclusions regarding

the efficacy of mindfulness. A common weakness in a significant number of the investigated

studies is the use of small and, in many cases, a relatively homogenous sample, which

certainly limits the external validity of the outcomes. For example, in meta-analysis by

Khoury et al. (2015), mindfulness based interventions demonstrated moderate effect sizes

for decreasing anxiety (Cohen’s d = 0.56), as well as depression (Cohen’s d = 0.67), yet

many of these studies had several methodological limitations such as blinding and

randomization, which could be vital to establish the causal relationships.

Using both a cross-sectional and daily diary design, Weinstein et al. (2009) sought to

look at how mindfulness influenced stress appraisal and coping strategies of university

students. Mindfulness is known to be effective in improving areas such as increased

centrality of emotions, social coping resources, and enhanced life satisfaction (Garland et

al., 2011). Although it was observed that positive stress appraisals and better coping

strategies were linked to increased mindfulness, important methodological limitations were

 14

identified including the small sample size (n =100), and the use of self-report measures that

might be affected by response bias. Moreover, results from cross-sectional research cannot

indicate the cause-and-effect relationships: it remains unknown whether enhanced stress

appraisals are a consequence of increased mindfulness or, on the contrary, people who

possess positive stress appraisals practice mindfulness.

The increased interest in the use of mindfulness interventions has also spread into

the study of technological approaches to the implementation of mindfulness-based

programmes. A systematic review by Bostock et al. (2019) focused on reviewing the effects

of mindfulness meditation via smartphone applications for working populations (n=238).

They discovered that well-being rose even after the intervention, thus mindfulness practice

could be inextricably merged with contemporary technologies. However, the following

limitations were observed: only one mindfulness intervention through a specific app was

used, therefore the generalisation of some of the results is unclear. Second, it may be

argued that participants might have had self-selected themselves into mindfulness activities

hence biassing the results. Such limitations provide the evidence for the necessity to use

more extensive types of mindfulness interventions in further experiments and control

selection biases.

Stress and Mental Well-Being Among University Students

Stress and mental health are intricately related to one another and to the person’s

emotions, thought processes, and behaviors. Gail Wagnild (2009) highlighted the necessity

to understand to not only to classify stress as an occurrence, but as a continuum that

gradually destroys the mental well-being of a student. As reported in prior studies, stress is

common among university students and has been found to bear a strong probability with

mental health. Some of the researches which have reported the negative impact of stress

include those by Adlaf et al. (2001) and Dyrbye et al. (2006) who established that stress

reduces academic performance, destroys social relations and has immense negative effect

of mental well-being. In a study conducted among 10,000 Canadian university students by

Adlaf et al. (2001) revealed that 43% of the students admitted feeling overwhelmed by
 15

anxiety, with most participants reported that stress affected their academic performance.

However, the use of self-report measures and cross-sectional data limits to address stress in

terms of students’ development over time cannot be fully assessed.

A cross-sectional survey with 1,660 participants of the University of Melbourne’s

medical course found high levels of burnout and psychological distress in the study reported

by Dyrbye et al. (2006). The study acknowledged the need for preventing stress and anxiety

to protect the mental well-being of students. Nevertheless, the restriction of the participants

to the medical students may reduce the generalization of the results to other student

population. Stressors and mental health problems may also differ across academic

disciplines and are not identified in research focused on a particular population.

Zimmaro et al. (2016) also supported the findings observed on the benefits of

mindfulness to well-being among the undergraduate students. The researchers adopted self-

report questionnaires and physiological measures, such as cortisol levels. Although, the

research evidence indicated that mindfulness levels were negatively associated with stress

the consumerization of data using self- reporting instruments rendered it vulnerable to

demand characteristics, whereby participants provide opinions that conform to social norms.

In addition, there was cross-sectional study design, which limited the researchers in

establishing causality between the variables. Future studies could use longitudinal designs

to get a sense of the stress and well-being modifying effects of mindfulness in the long run.

Similarly, Sampath et al. (2019) studied mindfulness, perceived stress, anxiety, and

depression of undergraduate medical students (n=150). Findings revealed statistically

significant low levels of all three dependent variables among participants with high

mindfulness levels. This study is useful because it targets the population of medical students

only, but the problem is that the data collected are self-reported and thus could be biased.

Moreover, issues limit this study’s external validity since most of the participants were similar

in demographic characteristics. Further studies should incorporate students from a variety of

faculties and cultural context to examine multifarious impacts of mindfulness.

 16

Moreover, most of these investigations are conducted on samples from the Western

countries thereby raising issues about external validity of the conclusions in poly ethnic

contexts. Nonetheless, while there is a rising interest in the implementation of mindfulness,

one major limitation of this line of research is that very little comparative investigations have

been conducted amongst non-western communities regarding the effectiveness of

mindfulness particularly in the gender spectrum such as Pakistan where culture and social

norms are positive determinants of stress.

Furthermore, gender differences remain investigated relatively poorly, although there

are some signs that gender can influence the result of practicing mindfulness in one or

another manner (Matud, 2004; Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012). The present study focuses on filling

these gaps by discussing cultural and gender differences in mindfulness in a non-Western

context and exploring the relationships between mindfulness, stress, and mental health

among university students of Pakistan who are currently an under-represented group in

terms of mindfulness research.

Gender differences, Culture, and Mindfulness

Mindfulness as a concept must be embraced in a certain culture and acceptance

because people’s attitude towards it contributes to its success as an intervention. Cultural

norms, and cultural beliefs also play a strong role on receptivity to mindfulness, according to

Fischer et al. (2008). To the Western culture, the mindfulness is viewed as a useful asset for

the improvement of a person’s life. Furthermore, mindfulness may prove to be differently

interpreted by people of non-western countries, such as Pakistan, through a religious or

spiritual way that maybe significantly impact current approaches to modern mental health

intervention. Even though mindfulness treatments can help in reducing stress and enhancing

the quality of life according to studies carried out in western societies, future research is

needed to envisage the generalization of outcomes obtained in other parts of the world.

Cultural attitudes toward mindfulness can also provide better insights and understanding

while adapting mindfulness interventions as well as increase the positive acceptance among

come cultures.
 17

Zollars et al. (2019) hypothesized in his study: “Gender is likely to significantly

moderate the relationship between mindfulness and stress”, such that mindfulness

decreases stress in the two genders but in different ways. There can be found a significant

interaction between gender and results that proved mindfulness decreasing stress, which

means that the positive impact of mindfulness on stress is related to gender. Stress might be

a different experience in man compared to that in women and, as such, mindfulness might

be more helpful to the man in enhancing emotional empathy and self-regulation, skills in

which the man is initially lacking (Johnson, 2016). Matud (2004) established that women

suffer more perceived stress than men, which he said may be due to culture and competing

demands of family roles. Women may also have higher benefits attributed to mindfulness

interventional since the sex engages more in emotional regulation (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012).

Gender differences in the application of mindfulness practice and how these

practices affect the mental well-being of individuals have lately become a focus of research.

Previous studies have shown that different genders may use mindfulness differently in a

manner that affects the success of the intervention strategies. For example, existing

research has suggested that women possess higher levels of mindfulness than men and this

is precipitated by the socialization process cultivated to ensure women develop emotional

intelligence more than men (Brenner et al., 2017).

Goyal et al. (2014) conducted a meta-analysis of 47 papers on mindfulness and

mental health and determined that MBIs decrease stress and increase well-being with

students from universities among others. Furthermore, it was indicated that both males and

females seem to get an equal benefit out of mindfulness interventions. On the other hand,

other studies suggest that gender segregation could increase the efficacy of mindfulness

practices among participants. For instance, Brown and Ryan (2003) state that women

seemed to benefit more when in gender-sensitive mindfulness programs that included all the

existing cultural as well as social issues.

Furthermore, Zollars et al. (2019) revealed that the majority of both male and female

students exhibited similar decreases in stress after relief in mindfulness practice However,
 18

sex differences existed regarding the participation in the mindfulness practice. Even though

Zollars et al. (2019) found no gender differences in the effects of mindfulness practice for

stress reduction, the enthusiasm for practicing mindfulness and the way women compared to

men regulate their emotions can be expected. Knowledge of these differences is important

for designing gender-sensitive forms of mindfulness that would help to address the needs of

both genders. Gender differences in mindfulness outcomes could have important

implications for the development and application of mindfulness-based treatments, so will be

an important direction for future research. The present study aims to redress this gap

through comparing gender differences in mindfulness, stress, and mental health among the

university students in Pakistan.

Novelty and Gaps

Despite the positive results achieved through mindfulness interventions, there are

multiple concerns revealed in the literature, inherent to many studies. A usual concern is the

homogeneity of samples, which reduces the generalizability of the results. Most of the

research have used homogenized sample, for instance university students from western

countries, medical workers, or people with inclination towards mindfulness practices. This is

especially so because the present research considers university students from Pakistan, a

group that has not been extensively explored in the literature on mindfulness. Extending the

demographics of mindfulness-based studies can help researchers provide a broader

understanding of how this activity might help or hinder stress and mental health across

cultures. In addition, mindfulness research is highly dependent on self- report measures

which increase the possibility of response bias. It can be therefore expected that participants

are more likely to provide positive results after the mindfulness interventions than what they

really feel.

Present Study

There has been increased interest and research on mindfulness with its effects on

stress and well-being; however, much research remains to be done especially cross

culturally. This study seeks to answer this by looking at mindfulness, stress, and mental
 19

health amongst university students in Lahore, Pakistan. Furthermore, as MBIs have been

observed to be efficacious, more quantitative investigations are called for regarding how

mindfulness influences these effects. According to the research in this study, different

validated tools, namely, the Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS), Perceived

Stress Scale (PSS), and Mental Health Continuum short form (MHC-SF), are used to assess

mindfulness, stress, and well-being in undergraduates.

The objectives of the study include: (1) to establish the correlation between

mindfulness, stress, and mental health; (2) to determine whether gender influences this

correlation; and (3) to determine how mindfulness as a predictor of stress decrease and

increase in mental well-being. The present study tested the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1 (H1) there is likely to be a positive correlation between mindfulness and mental

well-being whereby higher level of mindfulness will enhance the level of mental well-being;

Hypothesis 2 (H2) there is likely to be a negative correlation between mindfulness and stress

such that the higher the level of mindfulness will be correlated to the lower perceived level of

stress; and Hypothesis 3 (H3) gender differences are likely to influence the relationship

between mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being, meaning that the effects of

mindfulness in reducing stress and increasing mental well-being will have varying effects on

both the male and female students. The current study therefore seeks to explore the impact

of mindfulness on the well-being of students in a non-Western university as well as establish

the moderating role of gender.

Methods

Stress and mental well-being issues exacerbating in university students have been

noted especially in the last few years . The present study aims to establish the relationship

between mindfulness (independent variable) and stress reduction and mental well-being

(dependent variables) of students from IVY College of Management Sciences in Lahore,

Pakistan. These correlations are examined by using established psychometric tests (MAAS,

PSS, MHC-SF). This study is designed to target a non-Western student population as a

means of offering a unique perspective on mindfulness and its effects on well-being and thus
 20

helps to address a paucity of literature on mindfulness in diverse contexts. The methods

section presents the participants, design, materials, and the procedure while giving a

detailed approach to mindfulness as a predictor of mental well-being and stress change in

this cultural population.

Participants

The sample size was calculated using G*Power software, with the following

parameters: a moderator effect at medium level (f = 0. 25), statistical power of 0. 80, and an

alpha level of 0.02, therefore providing adequate statistical power to support significant

results. There was a total of 199 (N=199) participants in the study from which 99 were males

and 100 females, aged between 18 and 25 years, all undergraduate students at IVY College

of Management Sciences (ICMS). This age group was chosen simply because it is

representative of undergraduate students, as well as because of high stress and several

mental well-being issues for which this population is at risk, making it ideal for mindfulness

research. These parameters are consistent with those used in other similar studies (Jones et

al., 2020; Shabani & Khalatbari, 2019; Zollars et al., 2019).

The use of purposive sampling to conduct this study was most appropriate as it

allows the identification and selection of participants who possess certain characteristics in

relation to the core research questions under discussion. Purposive sampling is deficient

with the selection bias problem since participants must be selected based on the

researcher’s discretion the results obtained may not be generalizable to the population.

Despite this, it was the only method theoretically appropriate for the given study, as it

involved students of ICMS. Students from ICMS were selected purposefully because

mindfulness, stress and mental well-being were investigated in this population with a

homogeneous culture and education background. One of the main formative influences is

that students attending one institution only is less likely to produce confounding variables of

different levels of academic pressures, cultural practice, and socio-economic status. The

inclusion criteria required that participants should be undergraduate students aged 18-25
 21

years. Any student from any year within the ICMS was allowed to participate in the study

while those from other institutions were not allowed to participate.

The Arden University Ethics Committee approved the ethical clearance for collection

of the data. Each participant signed a consent form where they agreed to take part in the

study, ensuring that their participation was completely voluntary. There was no risk to any

participants’ physical health, however, there is a slim chance that inquiring about someone’s

mental well-being will make them think negatively, for this support groups were provided.

Throughout the study, all participant’s identity was maintained confidential, and anonymity

was observed as recommended by the BPS guidelines for ethical conduct of research. All

data was secured in password-encrypted files and raw data was destroyed as soon as it was

no longer required, and any identifying information of the participants were excluded for

privacy protection of the participants.

Design

A quantitative cross-sectional design was employed to identify the relationship

between mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being. Cross-sectional design is

when data is being gathered at one specific time from the participants and it is useful for

establishing regularities and interconnections between some factors without altering

experiences of respondents. (Cummings, 2018). The correlational design was used because

the study aimed to investigate the research questions of concern which focuses on the

correlation between mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being; and therefore, does not

have to manipulate any conditions among the targeted university students. Such an

approach suits the purpose of the study to determine natural relations in a real world setting

for students in an educational setting. Although cause and effect are difficult to prove by a

correlational design, this design was considered more appropriate for this analysis that other

designs, such as experimental or longitudinal design because of its ability to measure the

relationships between all variables at a single point of time, thus serving the aims and

limitations of the study. The present study suggests future research directions like

longitudinal or experimental research to expand on the causal and temporal nature of these
 22

relationships. It is with this connection that the present research aims to give a base

knowledge that subsequent research can build upon.

The operationalizing of each variable was done using validated psychometric tests

standardized and chosen because of the widely applied usage in mindfulness and mental

health studies. Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale was employed to measure

mindfulness (IV). The dependant variables were measured using the Perceived Stress Scale

(PSS) for stress and mental well-being was measured using Mental Health Continuum short

form (MHC-sf). The selection of these scales was opted due to their increased psychometric

properties and high levels of validity. Their selection also follows data from previous

research that confirmed that these scales can accurately capture the intended constructs for

analysing the relationships between mindfulness, stress, and mental health in university

students.

Materials

The following tolls were chosen for their high levels of validity and reliability and

usage within the field of mindfulness research.

Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS)

This is a 15-item questionnaire that measures dispositional mindfulness on a scale of

1 (almost always) to 6 (almost never) (Appendix A, Table 1). This scale was used because it

measures exactly what is wanted in a present-moment awareness, one of the main pillars of

Mindfulness (Brown & Ryan, 2003), also, it aligns with the present study’s focus on

mindfulness. Moreover, it is recognized globally for its psychometric properties. To test

internal consistency of the MAAS, Cronbach’s alpha (a = 0.87) yielded satisfactory reliability

value (MacKillop & Anderson, 2007).

Higher scores to the MAAS are an indication of increased mindfulness, meaning that

a person stays aware at the present moment instead of being occupied by the past or the

future. If a participant attained a mean score of 5, it would demonstrate higher levels of

mindfulness than the one with mean score of 3. To calculate the data gathered, simply

compute the mean of the 15 items and higher scores represents higher level of mindfulness.
 23

Example Question:

I find myself preoccupied with the future or past

1. Almost always

2. Very frequently

3. Somewhat frequently

4. Somewhat infrequently

5. Very infrequently

6. Almost never

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)

The PSS is a 10-item self-report that aim at measuring perceived stress levels of the

participants for the last one month (Cohen et al., 1983). These responses are made on 4

Likert scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (very often) (Appendix A, Table2). This scale was

chosen because it has demonstrated psychometric proficiency for contrasting populations

and is appropriate for stress research (Baer et al., 2012; Cordon, 2009; Kechter et al., 2019).

To arrive at the total scores for this scale, it is necessary to apply reverse scoring on certain

items such as 4, 5, 7, and 8 (Reis et al., 2010). For instance, if a participant has responded

with 0 (never) to these items, then the response will be coded as 4 (very often).

High stress levels can be indicated through greater scores on the PSS. Low scores

for the PSS would imply that the individual scored better in mindfulness and vice versa. This

assists in comprehending the negative relationship between mindfulness and stress

reduction. In the present study the reliability measure in terms of internal consistency of the

PSS was found to be good (a = 0.85).

Example Question:

In the last month, how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your

personal problems?

0. Never

1. Almost never

2. Sometimes
 24

3. Fairly often

4. Very often

Mental Health Continuum short form (MHC-sf)

This psychometric test is used for evaluating one’s mental well-being in the realms of

emotion, social interactions, and psychological dimension using a 14-item scale that range

from 0 (never) to 5 (everyday) (Appendix A, Table 3). Furthermore, it is divided into 3

subgroups (emotional, social, psychological) well-being. The following items (1-3) indicates

emotional well-being, (4-8) social well-being, and (9-14) psychological well-being (Lamers et

al., 2011). The MHC-SF was prioritized due to the broad focus on well-being and this

measure’s demonstrated reliability across diverse samples; The internal consistencies were

high for the subscale’s emotional well-being (α = 0.82), social well-being (α = 0.79), and

psychological well-being (α = 0.86).

Increased general well-being is indicated by greater score on the MHC-sf. Higher

scores in the subscales mentioned above reflect positive mental well-being. Scores nearer to

5 (everyday) on the items regarding emotional well-being means frequently positive

emotions, high scores in the social and psychological domains means strong social relations

and better psychological well-being. To achieve representativeness of the target population

in the scale, cultural sensibility and translation where required were accorded high priority.

Example Question:

During the past month, how often did you feel…

Happy

1. Never

2. Once or twice

3. About once a week

4. 2 or 3 times a week

5. Almost everyday

6. Everyday
 25

Procedure

The present study obtained Ethical approval from the Ethics Committee of Arden

University before data collection began to ensure the safety of participants rights and well-

being. A physical study was conducted at IVY College of Management Sciences, Lahore,

after permission was obtained from the principal of the institution through a gatekeeper form.

Participants were welcomed and respectfully seated in the classroom designated for the

research. Upon arrival, a debriefing process was conducted that intended to make sure that

the participants did not experience any psychological harm after the study as provided by

BPS ethical guidelines. Following this, an information sheet was given to all participants

which consisted of all the necessary details such as the objectives of the study, procedures,

and participants rights to withdraw. Participants were given an ample amount of time to

carefully go through the information sheet. To enhance comprehension, the participants

were encouraged to make questions and the researcher ensured that all questions were

answered appropriately regarding their roles and the importance of the study.

At the end of all the questions, participants signed a consent form, which states that

participants were given the right to withdraw at any point they wished without any objections

or consequences, ensuring voluntary participation. Each participant was assigned a code

number to maintain confidentiality in compliance with GDPR Regulations (2018) and the

BPS Data Protection Guidelines. Next, demographic details were gathered such as age,

gender, and other relevant attributes through a demographic sheet since these factors could

influence the relationships under observation. Subsequently, participants had to fill out 3

psychometric tests: MAAS, PSS, and MHC-SF. Even though each scale consisted of clear

instructions, the researcher and supervisor were always present for any queries or extra

guidance if required. To reduce the chances of experimental bias the researcher did not help

the participants in any way when filling the scale items and only explained what needed to

be done. This allowed the participants to feel accompanied while at the same time, complete

the tests on their own.

 26

Participants were encouraged to answer honestly by relating the questions with their

experiences in the past. It took approximately 10 to 15 minutes to finish each psychometric

test and the whole data collection took approximately 40 minutes to complete. It was

ensured to all the participants that their results would be kept private, and they did not have

to answer any question that they did not wish to. Once the testing was completed, the

participants were thanked for their participation in assisting experts to better understand the

relationship between mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being. They were

reminded again about their right to withdraw and remove their data at any time before the

beginning of the analyses. Finally, a debriefing session was conducted where the

participants were assured that their data would be kept confidential and secured, stored in

password protected and encrypted databases.

Results

This chapter outlines the statistical analyses of the present study which aims to

pustulate the relationship between mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being

among university students. The data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social

Sciences (SPSS) 27. The results are organized into several key sections: Introduction and

participants description, group characteristics, justification of method of data analysis,

method of data analysis, results, non-parametric tests, and conclusion. The findings of the

study will also incorporate the examination of differences between male and female

participants as well to give more understanding to the observed relations. To enhance the

understanding of the results, the quantitative outcomes are supported by graphical

illustrations.

Participants and Grouping

The target population of this research was comprised of 199 university students aged

between 18 and 25 years with a nearly equal gender distribution of 99 males and 100

females. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A (participants who engaged in

mindfulness practice) (n = 72) and Group B (participants who did not engage in mindfulness

practice) (n = 127). In addition to the distribution of the sample according to their age and
 27

gender, additional information regarding the study participants is critical to provide

background to the results. The participants completed three standardized questionnaires

(MAAS, PSS, MHC-sf).

Descriptive Information

The initial test included descriptive statistics for the two Groups. This section

presents the result in terms of mean, standard deviation, range, etc of mindfulness, stress,

and mental well-being.

Group A (Participants who engaged in mindfulness)

Mindfulness Scores

Using SPSS, the mean scores for Group A were generated (M = 56.64, S.D =7.17,

Range: 36) (Appendix B, Table 1). This means that participants who practiced mindfulness

had higher levels of mindfulness. Range, which is the difference between the lowest and

highest scores was 36. Meaning, there were fluctuations in the mindfulness levels of the

participants. Increased scores portray greater engagement in mindfulness practices, which

could positively contribute to mental well-being outcomes. This variability relates to H1 that

mindfulness has direct positive relationship with mental well-being; these scores on

mindfulness suggests that those who can apply mindfulness can develop better well-being.

Stress Scores

The mean score for stress in this group (M = 19.08, S.D = 3.24, Range: 15)

(Appendix B, Table 1), shows that even though majority of the participants had low stress

levels, some of the participants had mid or high stress levels. This finding concurs with other

studies as mindfulness often results in decreased stress. For example Keng et al. (2011),

have postulated that mindfulness results in more than a 50% reduction in stress, similar to

the results of the current study suggesting lower levels of stress with high mindfulness

practice. These results are in accordance with H2, which expected a negative relationship

between mindfulness and stress.

 28

Mental Well-Being Scores

Group A scores for mental well-being (M = 57.96, S.D = 5.29, Range: 21) (Appendix

B, Table 1), shows that while the mental health data was generally positive, there was still

some spread all in participants across all levels. This is in agreement with literature showing

that mindfulness is related with better mental well-being results (Brown & Ryan, 2003). This

is an implication of H1, where the positive relationship between mindfulness and mental well-

being was supported by the mean scores.

Group B: Participants who did not practice mindfulness

Mindfulness Scores

The mean score for Group B (M = 44.43, S.D = 12.11, Range: 70) (Appendix B,

Table 2), indicated significantly lower levels of mindfulness as compared to the participants

in Group A. The range indicates that several participants marked neither of the options

showing that most of them did not practice mindfulness at all. This difference goes a long

way in supporting the contention that practicing mindfulness will enhance an individual’s

mindfulness levels on average.

Stress Scores

The stress scores for Group B (M = 29.39, S.D = 6.79, Range: 21) (Appendix B,

Table 2), indicated relatively higher levels of stress than in Group A. The range value shows

that although most of the participants had high stress level there were a few whose stress

level was slightly lower. This concurs with prior literatures which states that lack of

participation in mindfulness negatively affects the stress levels (Goyal et al., 2014).

Mental Well-Being Scores

Group B had a significantly lower mean scores (M = 37.95, S.D = 12.74, Range: 44)

(Appendix B, Table 2) for mental well-being in comparison to Group A. The range of 44

suggests that although some of the participants expressed greater levels of mental well-

being, several participants identified considerable difficulties in this realm; it is therefore with

such evidence that this study seeks to show the usefulness of mindfulness practices in

improving mental well-being.

 29

Justification for Chosen Analyses

Statistical methods used in the data analysis included several tests. The Shapiro-

Wilk test showed that the data did not qualify for normal distribution hence the use of non-

parametric tests. More specifically, the scores of mindfulness had a skewness of 0.36 and

kurtosis of 1.20 which marked the insignificantly positive skewness and moderate non-

normal distribution. Stress scores had a much less positive skewness of 0.55 and slightly

less kurtosis -0.86 which revealed that the distribution was less peaked and had flatter tails.

On the other hand, mental well-being score showed negative distribution with skewness of -

0.61 and kurtosis of - 0.73 indicating that they are slightly more peaked than the normal

distribution. Observations made from the Q-Q plots (Figures 1-6) also supported these

deviations, thus affording the decision to rely on non-parametric analysis to better

understand the relationships between mindfulness, stress, and well-being.

Non-parametric techniques were also used–Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon Signed

Rank test, and Kruskal Wallis H test–where assumptions of normality were violated. Mann-

Whitney U test was used here to compare the participants’ mindfulness, stress, and mental

well-being scores between two independent groups (mindfulness practitioners and non-

practitioners) since this test does not assume normality of the data collected. Wilcoxon

Signed Rank Test was employed for comparison of two related variables hence appropriate

for analysing the effects of mindfulness. Also, the Kruskal-Wallis H test was employed for the

comparison of three or more independent groups to maintain high levels of accuracy due to

non-normality of the data. Lastly, Spearman rank correlation was applied to make crucial

conclusions about relationships between these variables in the sample with non-normal

distribution.

Tests for Normality

The Shapiro-Wilk test was employed to analyse the normality of the data for all three

variables: mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being. This test can assist in

understanding whether the data was normally distributed or not, and it is a crucial

assumption for multiple statistical tests.

 30

The normality test for Group A revealed that all the variables of the present study;

mindfulness (W = .80, p <.001), stress reduction (W = .91, p = .02), and mental well-being

(W = .97, p = .01) did not meet the assumption of normality of distribution (Appendix B,

Table 3). Similarly, for Group B, all the variables under study; mindfulness (W = .53, p

<.001), stress reduction (W = .96, p <.001), and mental well-being (W = .93, p <.001) were

non-normally distributed (Appendix B, Table 4). Since all the variables under study violated

the assumption of normality in both groups (p < .05), non-parametric tests were used for

further analysis.

The independent samples t-test for Group A revealed that males (M = 60.42, S.D =

4.476) scored significantly higher on the MHC-sf than females (M = 55.36, S.D = 4.853),

yielding a t-value of t(72) = 4.67, p < .001), with a mean difference of 5.06. Conversely, no

gender differences were observed with PSS scores for males (M = 19.29, S.D = 3.36) and

females (M = 18.86, S.D = 3.15), t(72) = 0.57, p = .57. The MAAS scores also did not reveal

gender differences t(72) = 1.68, p = .10, between males (M = 55.29 , SD = 9.08) and

females (M = 58.06, S.D = 4.01).

Similarly for Group B, the MHC-sf did not differ between males (M = 38.69, S.D =

11.87) and females (M = 37.25, S.D = 13.58), t(72) = 0.63, p = .53). In PSS too, male

participants (M = 28.43, S.D = 6.84) and female participants (M = 30.31, S.D = 6.67) were

also found to be insignificant; t(72) = -1.56, p = .12). However, in terms of MAAS, males (M =

46.62, SD = 13.94) scored comparatively higher than females (M = 42.34, S.D = 9.71), with

a t-value of t(72) = 2.00, p = .05 and a mean difference of 4.28. These results indicate that

gender differences in mental well-being might be influenced by mindfulness practice

whereas perceived stress do not differ between genders in both groups.

The following results suggest that first, the variables for both groups did not have

normal distributions and therefore Spearman correlation coefficient and the Mann-Whitney U

test should be used in the subsequent steps.

 31

Non-Parametric Tests

The association between gender and mindfulness (MAAS), stress (PSS), and mental

well-being (MHC-SF) were analysed using the independent samples t-test. The Mann-

Whitney U test was used due to violation of normality assumption of the data. The findings

showed that there was no significant difference between male and female students for any of

the variables. The Mann Whitney U-Test scores for mindfulness (U = 4578.00, p = .34),

stress (U = 4489.00, p = .26), and mental well-being (U = 4248.00, p = .08) (Appendix B,

Table 5). All p-values given were above the significance level of .05, leading to the retention

of the null hypothesis (H3); this meant that there were no significant differences in the

distribution over gender in mindfulness, stress, and well-being.

The Kruskal-Wallis H test provided the similar results regarding the mentioned

findings. The outcomes for mindfulness H(1) = 0.67, p = .72), stress H(1) = 2.29, p = .32,

and mental well-being H(1) = 2.18, p = .34 (Appendix B, Table 6), were similar indicating no

significant differences between two gender groups. Collectively, these results imply that

gender does not play a role in the relationship between mindfulness, stress, and mental well-

being among this sample. Thus, the H3 having indicated that gender is likely to influence the

relation between mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being is not supported by

the obtained results.

The Cohen’s d for mental well-being (d = 1.94), reveals that there was a significant

positive impact of mindfulness practices. Stress value for Cohen’s d (d = 1.87) demonstrates

a significant negative relationship between mindfulness and stress.

Spearman’s Correlation Test

Spearman’s rho is a useful measure in cases where data violates the assumptions of

normality as required when applying Pearson’s correlation. The results indicated that

mindfulness and stress were negatively associated (ρ = -0.67, p < .001) indicating that as

the mindfulness progresses, perceived stress levels reduce. Such negative relationship

indicates that people, who use mindfulness practices are protected better against stress.

Moreover, there is a positive relationship between mindfulness and mental well-being (ρ =

 32

0.63, p < .001) (Appendix B, Table 7) was observed, indicating that high levels of

mindfulness were associated with enhanced mental well-being.

Summary of Key Findings

The results depicted a sharp difference between the scores obtained by Group A

(participants who engaged in mindfulness practices) and Group B (participants who did not

engage in mindfulness practices). Significantly higher levels of mindfulness, lower stress

scores, and increased mental well-being scores were reported in Group A compared to the

data obtained by Group B. Demographics data revealed difference between mental well-

being scores within the Group A in which 59 male participants reported slightly higher scores

than 43 female participants. None the less, the results regarding the effects of gender on

stress and mindfulness scores did not show any significant differences in both groups.

Demographics data revealed difference between mental well-being scores within the Group

A in which some male participants reported significantly higher scores than female

participants. None the less, the results regarding the effects of gender on stress and

mindfulness scores did not show any significant differences in both groups. In general, the

data supports the need to embrace mindfulness practices as a useful way of improving

mental well-being and reducing stress in university students.

Discussion

The discussion section of the present study reflects on the impact of mindfulness on

stress reduction and enhancement of mental well-being, adopting theoretical and empirical

knowledge and highlighting certain limitations, along with directions for further investigation.

Moreover, the findings are discussed in relation to the research question and hypotheses

and to the existing literature on mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being.

Summary of Findings

In analysing the results, it emerged that Group A, which had practiced mindfulness,

had comparatively low stress levels and high levels of mental wellness compared to Group

B, which did not practice mindfulness. The present study is consistent with the previous

studies in underlining positive relationship of mindfulness with mental well-being and a

 33

negative relationship with stress (Fredrickson, 2004; Kabat-Zinn, 2003). The current study

revealed only small differences in mental well-being between males and females of

participants. According to these results, unlike prior findings, gender did not significantly

moderate the impact of mindfulness in the present study.

Research Question and Hypothesis

The research question of the present study was: What is the relationship between

mindfulness, stress reduction, and mental well-being among university students? From data

analysis derived from the current research, the answer to the above research questions is

positive.

Hypothesis 1 (H1) for the present study proposed that mindfulness is likely to have a

positive relationship with mental well-being. Participants who practiced mindfulness had

better well-being scores (M = 57.96) as compared to those who did not practice mindfulness

(M = 37.95). These results are consistent with the results reported in other studies that found

that the practice of mindfulness evokes positive affective states thereby enhances mental

well-being (Fredrickson et al., 2008; Shapiro et al., 2008). The findings of the present study

support H2; mindfulness has a direct role in psychological resilience and mental well-being

of a human being (Calvo et al., 2022).

Hypothesis 2 (H2) stated that mindfulness is likely to have a negative relationship

with stress. The analyses showed that the mean stress level of the study sample of the

mindfulness practitioners of Group A was significantly lower than that of the non-practitioners

of Group B. This finding agrees with other studies done on the impact of stress of MBIs

(Bennett & Dorjee, 2016; Sampath et al., 2019; Virgili, 2015). The second hypothesis was

also confirmed as the significant difference in stress scores comparing the two groups

proves that the participants who practice mindfulness might help in reducing stress.

In Hypothesis 3 (H3), it was expected that gender would moderate the relationship

between mindfulness, stress reduction and mental well-being. However, the study could not

substantiate that hypothesis to a large measure. Some differences in the level of well-being

were observed however they are not significant enough to affirm that gender brings a
 34

meaningful difference in relations between these variables. Hence, H3 was not supported,

and thus additional work is required in this area.

Interpretation of Findings

The conclusions derived from this research have practical and theoretical

implications for the study of mindfulness, stress, and well-being, as well as for the

development of mindfulness-based intervention programs. The findings of the present study

are consistent with a substantial body of related research supporting the positive effects of

mindfulness on psychological processes (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Kabat-Zinn, 2003). In

particular, participants who practiced mindfulness showed significant improvement in mental

well-being, and experienced decreased stress levels, in line with prior study that

demonstrated that mindfulness is effective in stress management and emotional regulation

(Keng et al., 2011). Some differences in mental well-being levels according to gender were

detected, nevertheless the differences were not great enough to assert that gender plays a

significant role in the relationships among these variables.

Mindfulness and Stress Reduction

The significant negative relationship between mindfulness and stress levels supports

H2 and indicates that higher levels of mindfulness compose lower levels of stress among

university students. This finding affirms the studies of other authors who multiplied the

results of utilizing the mindfulness technique in reducing stress (Keng et al., 2011). The

negative correlation is consistent with theories utilising mindfulness to manage emotional

and cognitive reserves, enabling people to respond to stressors more suitably.

The marked decrease in stress scores of the subjects practicing mindfulness imply

that mindfulness may offer clients useful approaches in dealing with academic demands and

other stressors peculiar to universities. The results obtained in this study support the earlier

studies that have indicated that mindfulness-based activities help in decreasing stress (Baer,

2003; Grossman et al., 2004). For example, the meta-analysis by Creswell (2017) on

mindfulness interventions stresses the fact that mindfulness enhances stress coping through

enhancing self-reported affect regulation and decreasing indices of stress. It is likely that the
 35

participants of Group A, who practiced mindfulness, got advantage of these mechanisms,

and therefore stress level was reduced.

Further, the broaden-and-build theory by Fredrickson (2004) can also explain the

relationship between mindfulness and stress reduction. In this theory, positive emotions

help to expand the cognition-behavior options an individual possesses and leads to the

creation of resources contributing to their resource appreciation in later times. Cognitive

techniques that are used in mindfulness practice including such feelings like gratitude and

acceptance may assist a person in reducing stress because such approaches probably

enlarge a perspective and provide more effective ways of reacting to stress-inducing stimuli

(Fredrickson et al., 2008).

Mindfulness and Mental Well-Being

The improvement of subjective well-being that has been found in the present study

following mindfulness can be understood with the help of the psychological mechanisms

linked to mindfulness practice. Brown and Ryan (2003) have found that mindfulness

enhances emotional awareness and responsiveness of stimulus, which leads to enhanced

ability to regulate one’s emotions appropriately and optimally psychological functioning.

Especially, mindfulness enables people to detach from the negative thinking which is

supposed to be a basis of the stress and numerous psychological disorders (Keng et al.,

2011).

These results are consistent with prior literature by Shapiro et al. (2008), which

showed that mindfulness interventions raise subjective well-being through decreasing the

manifestation of anxiety and depressive symptoms and enhancing satisfaction with life. The

participants in Group A probably reaped these advantages due to mindfulness practice

which helped them score higher on aspects of mental well-being. The positive relationship

between mindfulness and mental well-being confirms that the participants with higher levels

of mindfulness are likely to have better scores for mental well-being. These results are

supported by the broaden-and-build theory which enriches the understanding of the

connection between mindfulness and well-being. By focusing to positive emotions, such as

 36

contentment and joy, mindfulness enhances the creation of psychological resources which

further assist in achieving greater life satisfaction and resilience against misfortune

(Fredrickson et al., 2008). The overall change in the well-being of patients in Group A can be

explained by such changes.

Gender differences

Although certain variations in well-being levels were detected, they varied to a

degree that is insufficient to state that gender greatly influences these relationships. These

results contradict prior studies that expected differences in gender can influence

mindfulness, stress levels, and mental well-being. For example, it has been found that

women are likely to present with a heightened levels of emotional distress and mindfulness

practices may help them strengthen their coping mechanism (Fuentes et al., 2022) . Also,

studies show that women spend more time at self-regulation of emotions that could impact

the effectiveness of the mindfulness practices (Keng et al., 2011; Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012).

Altogether, these results support future research on how gender moderate the benefits of

mindfulness interventions.

Psychological Theory and Research Integration

Kabat-Zinn (2003) conceptual definition of MBSR as the practice of paying attention

to the present experience and accepting it. The significant decreases observed in the stress

levels amongst mindfulness practitioners in the present study supports Kabat-Zinn

perception that mindfulness promotes a non-judgmental awareness of thoughts and or

feelings that can enable person to manage stressors efficiently. This coincides with the

study’s finding that mindfulness helps university students acquire adaptive methods of

handling academic and other pressures.

From a well-being perspective, the positive correlation found in this present study

between mindfulness and mental well-being is consistent with Fredrickson (2004) broaden-

and-build theory. This framework suggests that mindfulness fosters positive emotional

experience thus improving the overall well-being of a human. The research outcomes

corroborate that regular mindfulness does not only alleviate stress but also boosts the
 37

psychological assets needed to sustain an optimum psychological state reducing the

adverse optics of mental well-being, thereby supporting the theory recommendations.

In addition, the study extends the work done by Brown and Ryan (2003) who argued

that mindfulness has a positive correlation with mental well-being. The present study

contributes to this line of research presenting evidence that besides enhancing well-being,

mindfulness also lessens stress, which offers broader insight into positive benefits of

mindfulness practice. This two-fold positive impact of mindfulness practice clearly explains

that fostering awareness and acceptance leads to overall positive mental well-being among

university students, underscoring how mindfulness can be conducive to stress decrease and

really help university students improve their mental well-being.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

The consequences stemming from the results presented in this analysis have

theoretical and practical implications for various domains. These findings provide further

compelling support for the use of mindfulness for reducing stress and improving mental well-

being, in addition to creating several research and clinical possibilities for follow-up work.

Considering theoretical propositions, the study also supplements empirical data on

the effectiveness of MBIs to decrease stress and increase well-being (Bennett & Dorjee,

2016; Virgili, 2015). The outcomes of the study are consistent with the MBSR program by

(Kabat-Zinn, 2003) and Fredrickson (2004) broaden-and-build theory by showing how

positive emotions generated through mindfulness practice can enhance psychological

resilience. Furthermore, the current study discusses how mindfulness could be used as a

tool enhance mental well-being and perceived quality of life (Brown & Ryan, 2003).

There is a possibility that equipping educational institutes or workplace settings with

mindfulness training could help individuals overcome stress and improve their mental well-

being (Holman et al., 2018). Practical application of mindfulness programmes such as

mobile applications for mindfulness practice or MBSR programs, can be effective for

teaching emotional regulation and stress coping strategies. In individuals, findings of strong

negative relationship between mindfulness and stress suggest that practicing mindfulness at
 38

the workplace and in other activities may substantially support the stress reduction. Since

mindfulness has a positive relationship with mental well-being, integrating these mindfulness

practices in personal growth programs may amplify strengths such as life satisfaction and

resilience. Since stress disorders are becoming more and more widespread in the modern

society, MBI’s seem to be effective and more importantly cost effective- way to enhance

psychological functioning. All these interventions can be easily tailored to diverse contexts,

including school and workplaces, and can be implemented through face-to-face classes,

online classes, and mobile applications.

These conclusions indicate that mindfulness approaches in Pakistani universities

may result in enhanced mental well-being results in students. Due to the increased levels of

academic stress and lack of availability of resources for mental health remains high in the

depicted region, perhaps introducing the acts of mindfulness to the students will give the

students a means with which they could clearly address their emotional state or distress.

University-based mindfulness interventions may be integrated into students’ support service

packages which possibly enhance their mental health, academic achievement, and coping

ability. Lack of awareness regarding the utility of the mindfulness is one of the major reasons

why students are not able to practice it and therefore awareness creation as well as

provision of reframed training that is culturally sensitive might enhance its appreciation.

Clinically, the results of the study point out at the possibility to add mindfulness

training as an extra set of methods for treating mental illness, focusing on individuals with

high level of stress or poor psychological health. Clinicians have the option to apply

mindfulness interventions to facilitate acting in, and reductions in anxiety, depression, and

burnout. For instance, MBSR or Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) may be

incorporated into therapeutic frameworks as a way of fostering long-term positive changes in

the functioning of the clients.

The results of this study indicate that improvements in mindfulness might be useful in

the treatment of people who suffer from stress-related disorders for example anxiety and

depression (Segal et al., 2002). Including mindfulness techniques into the current therapy
 39

could improve the effectiveness of the interventions and give the clients secondary skills in

coping with the problems. Furthermore, mindfulness apps may be used in educational

frameworks to enhance students’ mental well-being and integrated into workplace stress-

reduction intervention to aid employees in learning how to manage stress.

Limitations

Despite the research accomplishing these objectives and delivering considerable

promising findings, it also has some limitations. First and foremost, all assessed variables

were based on self-reports of mindfulness, stress, and well-being. The reliance on self-

reported data is a limitation due to potential biases such as social desirability or recall bias

(Podsakoff et al., 2003). In future studies it would be beneficial to use activities that are more

objective and provide concrete results, for example heart rate variability, cortisol levels and

use it as measure alongside the self-reported data and compare the results of the

mindfulness on stress and well-being.

Secondly, the distribution of participants included only young adults, which means

that the results cannot be generalised to the rest of the population at large. Future work

should recruit participants across a broader age range, even though young adulthood

appears to be a sensitive period for stress and emerging mental health challenges. Also, the

participants to the study originated from a particular culture hence the results may not be

generalised to other culture. Therefore, there is a need to conduct future research to

understand the effects of mindfulness on stress and well-being from such cultures.

Third, the study utilises a cross-sectional design, thus, offering a limited view of the

relative connection involving mindfulness, stress, and well-being at a particular moment in

time. Although positive correlations are identified for mindfulness with these outcomes;

however, the study design limits the generalisation of the results and does not permit cause

and effect conclusions to be made about the relationship between mindfulness and these

outcomes. Subsequent studies should employ longitudinal studies for measuring stress and

well-being over time so that the habits of practicing mindfulness have been instilled. More

research based as longitudinal designs would be useful in unravelling the effect of causal
 40

pathways by which mindfulness influences mental well-being and stress levels of an

individual.

Another limitation of the present study is the relatively small number of participants

who practiced mindfulness (n = 72), as compared to participants who did not practice

mindfulness (n = 127). A possible explanation for a lower scores of individuals practicing

mindfulness could be the existing levels of awareness regarding mindfulness in Pakistan.

These differences might be explained by cultural differences and the fact that mindfulness

seems to be understudied and not particularly stressed within the educational setting.

Therefore, students may not be aware of or make proper use of the benefits of practicing

mindfulness.

Lastly, the absence of a control group together with other potential treatments was

another limitation of the present study. Despite the statistical comparison of the mindfulness

practitioners and non-practitioners, the study lacked an equivalent experimental group that

received other forms of stress reducing procedures like relaxing exercises or cognitive

behavioral therapy. More research should be carried out in which the findings should be

compared with other therapy approaches in the handling of stress and optimizing well-being.

Recommendations for Future Research

First, as mentioned above, it is necessary to use more valid and reliable indices of

mindfulness and stress in the following researches to gain more insight into the actual

impact of mindfulness practising on physical health and psychological well-being. They could

perhaps use parameters like cortisol or heart rate variability to quantify the physiological

effects of stress, which is missing in observation of how mindfulness impacts the body’s well-

being. Furthermore, mindfulness should be studied with regards to maintaining positive

outcomes over time using longitudinal methods. Future research could involve longitudinal

mindfulness practice interventions and would be useful to determine the stability of the

effects of mindfulness practice on stress and well-being identified in this cross-sectional

study. Stress and mental well-being should be investigated longitudinally due to the nature of

the mindfulness interventions; longitudinal designs can help in identification of how these
 41

advantages change with time. Also, further cross-cultural research could provide

improvements in terms of mindfulness research by comparing the effects of mindfulness

across different cultures, thus observing both certain peculiarities of certain culture practices

and benefits of mindfulness for different people. Further, an investigation may be made

regarding the effects of mindfulness training on stress and the quality of life during change:

starting a new job or becoming a parent.

Besides, the future studies might examine the pathways by which mindfulness

alleviates or exacerbates stress and improves or undermines well-being. Even though the

current study looks at the relationship between mindfulness, stress, and well-being, it does

not look at factors that might help explain this relationship. Some examples of the outlined

potential influencers could be the target variable in the current study: 1) Emotional

Regulation, 2) Cognitive flexibility training, or 3) Self-compassion, which in earlier literature

are known to have their relationship with Mindfulness (Keng et al., 2011). Eradicating the

ways on how mindfulness influences psychological outcomes may enhance the specification

of mindfulness-based intervention for enhanced mental well-being.

Last, the increase of mindfulness should be investigated in future studies regarding

an additional moderating variable of individual differences with the outcomes of stress and

well-being. For instance, future studies could explore the mediating role of emotional

regulation and self-compassion in the relationship between mindfulness and stress. The

investigation of such individual differences could offer promising directions for understanding

who might benefit the most from mindfulness practice, and consequently, improve the design

of such approaches.

In conclusion, this study gives ample support to the role of mindfulness in decreasing

stress and improving mental well-being in the younger generation. It was discovered from

the results that mindfulness had a strong negative relationship with stress, and a positive

relationship with mental well-being. These results are supported by previous literature

regarding the psychological effects of mindfulness; thus, these sets of finding supplement

the literature on mindfulness-based interventions.

 42

The present study was a continuation of prior research that emphasized the

importance of mindfulness in increasing the mental well-being and reducing stress.

Quantitative measures and multiple psychometric scales were employed to establish the

relationships between mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being among university students.

The research took place in Lahore, Pakistan, which generates a novel view for mindfulness

information from a different geographic and cultural context which is relatively unexplored.

Thus, the combination of the quantitative method of data collecting and the choice of the

specific environment is designed to enhance the understanding of the effects of mindfulness

in the field of mental well-being and stress reduction.

Despite these limitations such as self-report data and a cross-sectional approach, the

study provides a foundation for understanding the role of mindfulness as an ability to

enhance mental well-being. Future studies should extend the present findings by employing

more inclusive objective assessment, by examining the sustained outcomes of mindfulness,

and by examining the processes and moderators of mindfulness interventions. Overall, the

present study contributes to the growing body of research on mindfulness by demonstrating

its differential effects on stress and mental well-being, with gender playing a significant

moderating role.
 43

References

Adlaf, E. M., Gliksman, L., Demers, A., & Newton-Taylor, B. (2001). The prevalence of

elevated psychological distress among Canadian undergraduates: Findings from the

1998 Canadian Campus Survey. Journal of American College Health, 50(2), 67-72.

Alsubaie, M., Abbott, R., Dunn, B., Dickens, C., Keil, T. F., Henley, W., & Kuyken, W.

(2017). Mechanisms of action in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and

mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) in people with physical and/or

psychological conditions: A systematic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 55, 74-

91.

Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: a conceptual and

empirical review. Clinical psychology: Science and practice, 10(2), 125.

Baer, R. A., Carmody, J., & Hunsinger, M. (2012). Weekly change in mindfulness and

perceived stress in a mindfulness‐based stress reduction program. Journal of clinical

psychology, 68(7), 755-765.

Bayram, N., & Bilgel, N. (2008). The prevalence and socio-demographic correlations of

depression, anxiety and stress among a group of university students. Social Psychiatry

and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 43, 667-672.

Beiser, M. (1974). Components and correlates of mental well-being. Journal of Health and

Social Behavior, 320-327.

Bennett, K., & Dorjee, D. (2016). The impact of a mindfulness-based stress reduction course

(MBSR) on well-being and academic attainment of sixth-form students. Mindfulness,

7(1), 105-114.

Bostock, S., Crosswell, A. D., Prather, A. A., & Steptoe, A. (2019). Mindfulness on-the-go:

Effects of a mindfulness meditation app on work stress and well-being. Journal of

occupational health psychology, 24(1), 127.

 44

Brenner, R. E., Heath, P. J., Vogel, D. L., & Credé, M. (2017). Two is more valid than one:

Examining the factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS). Journal of

Counseling Psychology, 64(6), 696.

Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role

in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 84(4), 822.

Calvo, V., D’Aquila, C., Rocco, D., & Carraro, E. (2022). Attachment and well-being:

Mediatory roles of mindfulness, psychological inflexibility, and resilience. Current

Psychology, 41(5), 2966-2979.

Cohen, S., Janicki-Deverts, D., & Miller, G. E. (2007). Psychological stress and disease.

Jama, 298(14), 1685-1687.

Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress.

Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 385-396.

Cordon, S. L. (2009). The role of mindfulness-based stress reduction on perceived stress:

Preliminary evidence for the moderating role of attachment style. Journal of

Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23(3), 258.

Creswell, J. D. (2017). Mindfulness interventions. Annual review of psychology, 68(1), 491-

516.

Cummings, C. L. (2018). Cross-sectional design. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication

Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Inc. Retrieved.

Dyrbye, L. N., Thomas, M. R., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2006). Systematic review of depression,

anxiety, and other indicators of psychological distress among US and Canadian

medical students. Academic medicine, 81(4), 354-373.

Felver, J. C., Morton, M. L., & Clawson, A. J. (2018). Mindfulness-based stress reduction

reduces psychological distress in college students. College Student Journal, 52(3),

291-298.
 45

Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broaden–and–build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical

transactions of the royal society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359(1449),

1367-1377.

Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts

build lives: positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build

consequential personal resources. Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(5),

1045.

Fuentes, A., Oyanadel, C., Zimbardo, P., González-Loyola, M., Olivera-Figueroa, L. A., &

Peñate, W. (2022). Mindfulness and balanced time perspective: predictive model of

psychological well-being and gender differences in college students. European

Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 12(3), 306-318.

Gail Wagnild, R. (2009). A review of the Resilience Scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement,

17(2), 105.

Garland, E. L., Gaylord, S. A., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2011). Positive reappraisal mediates the

stress-reductive effects of mindfulness: An upward spiral process. Mindfulness, 2, 59-

67.

Germer, C. (2004). What is mindfulness. Insight journal, 22(3), 24-29.

Goyal, M., Singh, S., Sibinga, E. M., Gould, N. F., Rowland-Seymour, A., Sharma, R.,

Berger, Z., Sleicher, D., Maron, D. D., & Shihab, H. M. (2014). Meditation programs

for psychological stress and well-being: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA

internal medicine, 174(3), 357-368.

Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress

reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,

57(1), 35-43.
 46

Holman, D., Johnson, S., & O’Connor, E. (2018). Stress management interventions:

Improving subjective psychological well-being in the workplace. Handbook of well-

being, 1-13.

Hölzel, B. K., Lazar, S. W., Gard, T., Schuman-Olivier, Z., Vago, D. R., & Ott, U. (2011).

How does mindfulness meditation work? Proposing mechanisms of action from a

conceptual and neural perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(6), 537-

559.

Johnson, M. (2016). Training future teachers to promote emotion regulation in the classroom

James Madison University].

Jones, B. J., Kaur, S., Miller, M., & Spencer, R. M. (2020). Mindfulness-based stress

reduction benefits psychological well-being, sleep quality, and athletic performance in

female collegiate rowers. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 572980.

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). Constructivism in the

Human Sciences, 8(2), 73.

Kechter, A., Black, D. S., Riggs, N. R., Warren, C. M., Ritt-Olson, A., Chou, C.-P., & Pentz,

M. A. (2019). Factors in the perceived stress scale differentially associate with

mindfulness disposition and executive function among early adolescents. Journal of

child and family studies, 28, 814-821.

Keller, S. (2020). What does mental health have to do with well‐being? Bioethics, 34(3), 228-

234.

Keng, S.-L., Smoski, M. J., & Robins, C. J. (2011). Effects of mindfulness on psychological

health: A review of empirical studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(6), 1041-1056.

Khoury, B., Sharma, M., Rush, S. E., & Fournier, C. (2015). Mindfulness-based stress

reduction for healthy individuals: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic

Research, 78(6), 519-528.

 47

Koolhaas, J. M., Bartolomucci, A., Buwalda, B., de Boer, S. F., Flügge, G., Korte, S. M.,

Meerlo, P., Murison, R., Olivier, B., & Palanza, P. (2011). Stress revisited: a critical

evaluation of the stress concept. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(5), 1291-

1301.

Lamers, S. M., Westerhof, G. J., Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster, P. M., & Keyes, C. L.

(2011). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the mental health continuum‐short

form (MHC‐SF). Journal of clinical psychology, 67(1), 99-110.

Liu, X., Ping, S., & Gao, W. (2019). Changes in undergraduate students’ psychological well-

being as they experience university life. International journal of environmental

research and public health, 16(16), 2864.

MacKillop, J., & Anderson, E. J. (2007). Further psychometric validation of the mindful

attention awareness scale (MAAS). Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral

Assessment, 29, 289-293.

Matud, M. P. (2004). Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and

Individual Differences, 37(7), 1401-1415.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2012). Emotion regulation and psychopathology: The role of gender.

Annual review of clinical psychology, 8(1), 161-187.

Pedrelli, P., Nyer, M., Yeung, A., Zulauf, C., & Wilens, T. (2015). College students: mental

health problems and treatment considerations. Academic psychiatry, 39, 503-511.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method

biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended

remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879.

Regehr, C., Glancy, D., & Pitts, A. (2013). Interventions to reduce stress in university

students: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of affective disorders, 148(1), 1-11.

 48

Reis, R. S., Hino, A., & Añez, C. (2010). Perceived stress scale. J. health Psychol, 15(1),

107-114.

Ribeiro, Í. J., Pereira, R., Freire, I. V., de Oliveira, B. G., Casotti, C. A., & Boery, E. N.

(2018). Stress and quality of life among university students: A systematic literature

review. Health Professions Education, 4(2), 70-77.

Robotham, D., & Julian, C. (2006). Stress and the higher education student: a critical review

of the literature. Journal of further and higher education, 30(02), 107-117.

Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic

approach to psychological well-being. Journal of happiness studies, 9, 13-39.

Sampath, H., Biswas, A. G., Soohinda, G., & Dutta, S. (2019). Mindfulness and its role in

psychological well-being among medical college students. Open journal of psychiatry

& allied sciences, 10(1), 52-56.

Segal, Z. V., Teasdale, J. D., Williams, J. M., & Gemar, M. C. (2002). The mindfulness‐

based cognitive therapy adherence scale: Inter‐rater reliability, adherence to protocol

and treatment distinctiveness. Clinical psychology & psychotherapy, 9(2), 131-138.

Selye, H. (1956). What is stress. Metabolism, 5(5), 525-530.

Shabani, M., & Khalatbari, J. (2019). The effectiveness of mindfulness-based stress reduction

training on emotion regulation difficulties and psychological well-being in

premenstrual syndrome. Health Psychology, 8(29), 134-152.

Shapiro, S. L., Carlson, L. E., Astin, J. A., & Freedman, B. (2006). Mechanisms of

mindfulness. Journal of clinical psychology, 62(3), 373-386.

Shapiro, S. L., Oman, D., Thoresen, C. E., Plante, T. G., & Flinders, T. (2008). Cultivating

mindfulness: effects on well‐being. Journal of clinical psychology, 64(7), 840-862.

Virgili, M. (2015). Mindfulness-based interventions reduce psychological distress in working

adults: a meta-analysis of intervention studies. Mindfulness, 6(2), 326-337.

 49

Weinstein, N., Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). A multi-method examination of the

effects of mindfulness on stress attribution, coping, and emotional well-being. Journal

of Research in Personality, 43(3), 374-385.

Zimmaro, L. A., Salmon, P., Naidu, H., Rowe, J., Phillips, K., Rebholz, W. N., Giese-Davis,

J., Cash, E., Dreeben, S. J., & Bayley-Veloso, R. (2016). Association of dispositional

mindfulness with stress, cortisol, and well-being among university undergraduate

students. Mindfulness, 7, 874-885.

Zollars, I., Poirier, T. I., & Pailden, J. (2019). Effects of mindfulness meditation on

mindfulness, mental well-being, and perceived stress. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching

and Learning, 11(10), 1022-1028.

 50

Appendices

Appendix A: Psychometric Tests

Table 1

Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS)

Day-to-Day Experiences

Instructions: Below is a collection of statements about your everyday experience. Using the

1-6 scale below, please indicate how frequently or infrequently you currently have each

experience. Please answer according to what really reflects your experience rather than

what you think your experience should be. Please treat each item separately from every

other item.

1 2 3 4 5 6
Almost Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Almost
Always Frequently Frequently Infrequently Infrequently Never

I could be experiencing some emotion and not 1 2 3 4 5 6

be conscious of it until some time later.
I break or spill things because of carelessness, 1 2 3 4 5 6
not paying attention, or thinking of something
else.
I find it difficult to stay focused on what’s 1 2 3 4 5 6
happening in the present.
I tend to walk quickly to get where I’m going 1 2 3 4 5 6
without paying attention to what I experience
along the way.
I tend not to notice feelings of physical tension 1 2 3 4 5 6
or discomfort until they really grab my
attention.
I forget a person’s name almost as soon as 1 2 3 4 5 6
I’ve been told it for the first time.
It seems I am “running on automatic,” without 1 2 3 4 5 6
much awareness of what I’m doing.
I rush through activities without being really 1 2 3 4 5 6
attentive to them.
I get so focused on the goal I want to achieve 1 2 3 4 5 6
that I lose touch with what I’m doing right now
to get there.
I do jobs or tasks automatically, without being 1 2 3 4 5 6
aware of what I'm doing.
I find myself listening to someone with one ear, 1 2 3 4 5 6
doing something else at the same time.
 51

I drive places on ‘automatic pilot’ and then 1 2 3 4 5 6

wonder why I went
there.
I find myself preoccupied with the future or the 1 2 3 4 5 6
past.
I find myself doing things without paying 1 2 3 4 5 6
attention.
I snack without being aware that I’m eating. 1 2 3 4 5 6
 52

Table 2

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)

The questions in this scale ask about your feelings and thoughts during the last month. In

each case, you will be asked to indicate how often you felt or thought a certain way.

Although some of the questions are similar, there are differences between them and you

should treat each one as a separate question. The best approach is to answer fairly quickly.

That is, don’t try to count up the number of times you felt a particular way; rather indicate the

alternative that seems like a reasonable estimate.

0 1 2 3 4
Never Almost Never Sometimes Fairly Often Very Often

In the last month, how often have you been upset 0 1 2 3 4

because of something that happened unexpectedly?
In the last month, how often have you felt that you 0 1 2 3 4
were unable to control the important things in your
life?
In the last month, how often have you felt nervous and 0 1 2 3 4
stressed?
In the last month, how often have you felt confident 0 1 2 3 4
about your ability to handle your personal problems?
In the last month, how often have you felt that things 0 1 2 3 4
were going your way?
In the last month, how often have you found that you 0 1 2 3 4
could not cope with all the things that you had to do?
In the last month, how often have you been able to 0 1 2 3 4
control irritations in your life?
In the last month, how often have you felt that you 0 1 2 3 4
were on top of things?
In the last month, how often have you been angered 0 1 2 3 4
because of things that happened that were outside of
your control?
In the last month, how often have you felt difficulties 0 1 2 3 4
were piling up so high that you could not overcome
them?
 53

Table 3

Mental Health Continuum short form (MHC-SF)

Place a checkmark in the box that best represents experiences and feelings during the past

month.

During the past month, Never Once About 2 or 3 Almost Every

how often did you feel . . . or twice once a times a every day
week week day
happy
interested in life
satisfied with life
that you had something
important to contribute to
society
that you belonged to a
community (like a social
group, school,
neighbourhood, etc.)
that our society is a good
place, or is becoming a better
place, for all people
that people are basically
good
that the way our society
works made sense to you
that you liked most parts of
your personality
good at managing the
responsibilities of your daily
life
that you had warm and
trusting relationships with
others
that you had experiences that
challenged you to grow and
become a better person
confident to think or express
your own ideas and opinions
that your life has a sense of
direction or meaning to it
 54

Appendix B: SPSS Outputs

Table 1

Descriptive statistics from SPSS for mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being of Group A

Conditions Statistic Std.

Error
Mental well- Mean 57.96 .614
being
95% Confidence Lower Bound 56.74
Interval for Mean Upper Bound 58.18
5% Trimmed Mean 58.04
Median 59.00
Variance 27.93
Std. Deviation 5.29
Minimum 46
Maximum 67
Range 21
Interquartile Range 8
Skewness -.30 .28
Kurtosis -.92 .55
Stress Mean 19.08 .38
95% Confidence Lower Bound 18.33
Interval for Mean Upper Bound 19.83
5% Trimmed Mean 18.94
Median 19.00
Variance 10.51
Std. Deviation 3.24
Minimum 14
Maximum 29
Range 15
Interquartile Range 5
Skewness .53 .28
Kurtosis .21 .56
Mindfulness Mean 56.64 .83
95% Confidence Lower Bound 54.97
Interval for Mean Upper Bound 58.30
5% Trimmed Mean 57.82
Median 60.00
Variance 51.44
Std. Deviation 7.17
Minimum 24
Maximum 60
Range 36
Interquartile Range 4
Skewness -2.84 .28
Kurtosis 9.26 .55
Note: Std. Error=Standard Error
 55

Table 2

Descriptive statistics from SPSS for mindfulness, stress, and mental well-being of Group B

Conditions Statistic Std.

Error
Mental well- Mean 37.95 1.14
being
95% Confidence Lower Bound 35.70
Interval for Mean Upper Bound 40.21
5% Trimmed Mean 38.26
Median 38.00
Variance 162.37
Std. Deviation 12.74
Minimum 14
Maximum 58
Range 44
Interquartile Range 21
Skewness -.29 .22
Kurtosis -1.17 .43
Stress Mean 29.39 .61
95% Confidence Lower Bound 28.19
Interval for Mean Upper Bound 30.59
5% Trimmed Mean 29.33
Median 28.00
Variance 46.10
Std. Deviation 6.79
Minimum 19
Maximum 40
Range 21
Interquartile Range 13
Skewness .213 .22
Kurtosis -1.37 .43
Mindfulness Mean 44.43 1.08
95% Confidence Lower Bound 42.29
Interval for Mean Upper Bound 46.58
5% Trimmed Mean 43.32
Median 40.00
Variance 146.62
Std. Deviation 12.11
Minimum 20
Maximum 90
Range 70
Interquartile Range 10
Skewness 1.56 .22
Kurtosis 4.67 .43
Note: Std. Error=Standard Error
 56

Figure 1

Q-Q Plots for Mindfulness (Group A)

 57

Figure 2

Q-Q Plots for Stress (Group A)

Figure 3

Q-Q Plots for Mental Well-Being (Group A)

 58

Figure 4

Q-Q Plots for Mindfulness (Group B)

 59

Figure 5

Q-Q Plots for Stress (Group B)

Figure 6

Q-Q Plots for Mental Well-Being (Group B)

 60

Table 3

Tests of Normality (Group A)

Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig.
Mindfulness .80 74 <.001
Stress .91 74 .02
Mental Well-Being .97 74 .01

Table 4

Tests of Normality (Group B)

Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig.
Mindfulness .53 125 <.001
Stress .96 125 <.001
Mental Well-Being .93 125 <.001

Table 5

Mann – Whitney U Test

Mindfulness Stress Mental well-being

Mann – Whitney U 4578.00 4489.00 4248.00
Wilcoxon W 9628.00 9439.00 9298.00
Z -.95 -1.14 -1.73
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .34 .26 ,08

Table 6

Kruskal – Wallis Test

Mindfulness Stress Mental well-being

Kruskal – Wallis H .67 2.29 2.18
df 2 2 2
Asymp. Sig. .72 .32 .34
 61

Table 7

Spearman’s Correlation Test

Mindfulness Stress Mental well-

being
Spearman’s Mindfulness Correlation 1.00 -.67** .63**
rho Coefficient
Sig. (2- <.001 <.001
tailed)
N 199 199 199
Stress Correlation -.67** 1.00 -.87**
Coefficient
Sig. (2- <.001 <.001
tailed)
N 199 199 199
Mental well- Correlation .63** -.87** 1.00
being Coefficient
Sig. (2- <.001 <.001
tailed)
N 199 199 199