TY - JOUR
T1 - Effects of mindfulness-based interventions on disruptive behavior
T2 - a meta-analysis of single-case research
AU - Klingbeil, David A.
AU - Fischer, Aaron J.
AU - Renshaw, Tyler L.
AU - Bloomfield, Bradley S.
AU - Polakoff, Ben
AU - Willenbrink, Jessica B.
AU - Copek, Rebecca A.
AU - Chan, Kai Tai
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - The popularity of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) is growing rapidly in schools. Decisions regarding the use of these interventions must be based on empirical evidence. There is robust evidence for the use of MBIs with adults, but research on MBIs with youth is nascent. The purpose of this meta-analytic review was to add to the literature by synthesizing single-case research on MBIs with children and adolescents. Specifically, the effect of MBIs on youths’ disruptive behavior was examined in 10 studies published between 2006 and 2014. Results indicated that, on average, MBIs had a medium effect on disruptive behavior during treatment, g = 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.30–1.78]; TauU = 0.59, 95% CI [0.40–0.77]. The average effect of MBIs during maintenance phases was larger, g = 1.41, 95% CI [0.55–2.28]; TauU = 0.71, 95% CI [0.59–0.83]. Potential moderators of intervention effects were also explored. Implications for future research and practice regarding MBIs with youth and in schools are discussed.
AB - The popularity of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) is growing rapidly in schools. Decisions regarding the use of these interventions must be based on empirical evidence. There is robust evidence for the use of MBIs with adults, but research on MBIs with youth is nascent. The purpose of this meta-analytic review was to add to the literature by synthesizing single-case research on MBIs with children and adolescents. Specifically, the effect of MBIs on youths’ disruptive behavior was examined in 10 studies published between 2006 and 2014. Results indicated that, on average, MBIs had a medium effect on disruptive behavior during treatment, g = 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.30–1.78]; TauU = 0.59, 95% CI [0.40–0.77]. The average effect of MBIs during maintenance phases was larger, g = 1.41, 95% CI [0.55–2.28]; TauU = 0.71, 95% CI [0.59–0.83]. Potential moderators of intervention effects were also explored. Implications for future research and practice regarding MBIs with youth and in schools are discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85003582694&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/pits.21982
DO - 10.1002/pits.21982
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85003582694
SN - 0033-3085
VL - 54
SP - 70
EP - 87
JO - Psychology in the Schools
JF - Psychology in the Schools
IS - 1
ER -