The effectiveness of self-help mindfulness-based cognitive therapy in a student sample: A randomised controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) involves approximately twenty hours of therapist contact time and is not universally available. MBCT self-help (MBCT-SH) may widen access but little is known about its effectiveness. This paper presents a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of MBCT-SH for students. Eighty students were randomly assigned to an eight-week MBCT-SH condition or a wait-list control. ANOVAs showed significant group by time interactions in favour of MBCT-SH on measures of depression, anxiety, stress, satisfaction with life, mindfulness and self-compassion. Post-intervention between-group effect sizes ranged from Cohen's d = 0.22 to 1.07. Engagement with MBCT-SH was high: participants engaged in mindfulness practice a median of two to three times a week and 85% read at least half the intervention book. Only 5% of participants dropped out. This is the first published RCT of MBCT-SH and benefits were found relative to a control group. MBCT-SH has the potential to be a low-cost, readily available and highly acceptable intervention. Future research should include an active control condition and explore whether findings extend to clinical populations.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Little evidence is available regarding the effectiveness of currently available self-help resources.
“Currently, many self-help resources are available to the general public, but little evidence regarding their effectiveness is available (Lever Taylor, Strauss, Cavanagh, & Jones, 2014).”
From A Mindfulness-Based Intervention: Differential Effects on Affective and Processual Evolution (2018) · cites this paper as Lever Taylor, Strauss, Cavanagh, & Jones, 2014
Lever Taylor et al. (2014) did not find any change in the describing subscale with their intervention.
“On the contrary, Lever Taylor et al. (2014), who conducted an 8-week program based on a series of 20-to 30-minute mindfulness practices and on a mindfulness cognitive therapy book, did not find any change in the describing subscale with their intervention.”
From A Mindfulness-Based Intervention: Differential Effects on Affective and Processual Evolution (2018) · cites this paper as Lever Taylor et al. (2014)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 49 · Cited by 76
- Authors
- Lever Taylor, B., Strauss, C., Cavanagh, K., & Jones, F.
- Affiliations
- University of Sussex (GB)
- Canterbury Christ Church University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Strauss, Clara
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-12
- Volume
- 63
- Pages
- 63-69
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2086115505
- Cited by
- 76
- References
- 49
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 5.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Create (Canterbury Christ Church University) (acceptedVersion)
- Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, self-help intervention, students, depression, anxiety, stress, self-compassion, mindfulness, life satisfaction, intervention engagement, acceptability
- MeSH terms
- Anxiety, Depression, Empathy, Female, Humans, Male, Personal Satisfaction, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Self Care, Students, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Single-Blind Method, Mindfulness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
