Cited by 11Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMental Health Research TopicsPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Disentangling trait and state psychological inflexibility: A longitudinal multilevel approach

Open access
Klimczak, Korena S., Schwartz, Sarah E., Donahue, Marissa L., Capel, Leila K., Snow, Janice L., Levin, Michael E.·2023·Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science

Abstract

An individual’s trait-like thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are characteristic patterns that occur across time, whereas state-like iterations of these variables are isolated to specific moments in time. Although highly correlated, variables at the trait and state levels measure different phenomena and should be examined separately. In this longitudinal study, we examine the disaggregation of trait and state-level psychological inflexibility among college students. Specifically, we investigated which psychological inflexibility subprocess would significantly predict positive affect, negative affect, and meaningful activity, both at the trait and state-levels. In addition to pre-and post-assessments, participants ( n = 168) completed ecological momentary assessment (EMA) surveys ( n = 2,251) assessing each of these variables via text message three times per day over the course of a week. Results suggested that while a greater number of state-like subprocesses significantly predict negative affect, positive affect, and meaningful activity, trait-like subprocesses hold more weight. Dominance analyses showed trait-level inaction to be the most important predictor for positive and negative affect, and trait-level of lack of contact with values to be the most important predictor for meaningful activity. Differentiating trait and state variables can enable contextual behavioral scientists to better understand pathological and therapeutic processes of change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcbs.2023.05.006

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Wiley, 2020

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Klimczak, K. S., Schwartz, S. E., Donahue, M. L., Capel, L. K., Snow, J. L., & Levin, M. E.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Corresponding author
Klimczak, Korena S.
Venue
Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-07
Volume
29
Pages
13-22
ISSN
2212-1447 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4379014321
Cited by
11
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
psychological inflexibility, positive affect, negative affect, meaningful activities, university students, ecological momentary assessment, dominance analysis

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