Cargando…

Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND: The use of positive psychological interventions may be considered as a complementary strategy in mental health promotion and treatment. The present article constitutes a meta-analytical study of the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions for the general public and for individ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bolier, Linda, Haverman, Merel, Westerhof, Gerben J, Riper, Heleen, Smit, Filip, Bohlmeijer, Ernst
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3599475/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23390882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-119
_version_ 1782262971671511040
author Bolier, Linda
Haverman, Merel
Westerhof, Gerben J
Riper, Heleen
Smit, Filip
Bohlmeijer, Ernst
author_facet Bolier, Linda
Haverman, Merel
Westerhof, Gerben J
Riper, Heleen
Smit, Filip
Bohlmeijer, Ernst
author_sort Bolier, Linda
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The use of positive psychological interventions may be considered as a complementary strategy in mental health promotion and treatment. The present article constitutes a meta-analytical study of the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions for the general public and for individuals with specific psychosocial problems. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed, PsychInfo, the Cochrane register, and manual searches. Forty articles, describing 39 studies, totaling 6,139 participants, met the criteria for inclusion. The outcome measures used were subjective well-being, psychological well-being and depression. Positive psychology interventions included self-help interventions, group training and individual therapy. RESULTS: The standardized mean difference was 0.34 for subjective well-being, 0.20 for psychological well-being and 0.23 for depression indicating small effects for positive psychology interventions. At follow-up from three to six months, effect sizes are small, but still significant for subjective well-being and psychological well-being, indicating that effects are fairly sustainable. Heterogeneity was rather high, due to the wide diversity of the studies included. Several variables moderated the impact on depression: Interventions were more effective if they were of longer duration, if recruitment was conducted via referral or hospital, if interventions were delivered to people with certain psychosocial problems and on an individual basis, and if the study design was of low quality. Moreover, indications for publication bias were found, and the quality of the studies varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis show that positive psychology interventions can be effective in the enhancement of subjective well-being and psychological well-being, as well as in helping to reduce depressive symptoms. Additional high-quality peer-reviewed studies in diverse (clinical) populations are needed to strengthen the evidence-base for positive psychology interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3599475
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35994752013-03-17 Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies Bolier, Linda Haverman, Merel Westerhof, Gerben J Riper, Heleen Smit, Filip Bohlmeijer, Ernst BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The use of positive psychological interventions may be considered as a complementary strategy in mental health promotion and treatment. The present article constitutes a meta-analytical study of the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions for the general public and for individuals with specific psychosocial problems. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed, PsychInfo, the Cochrane register, and manual searches. Forty articles, describing 39 studies, totaling 6,139 participants, met the criteria for inclusion. The outcome measures used were subjective well-being, psychological well-being and depression. Positive psychology interventions included self-help interventions, group training and individual therapy. RESULTS: The standardized mean difference was 0.34 for subjective well-being, 0.20 for psychological well-being and 0.23 for depression indicating small effects for positive psychology interventions. At follow-up from three to six months, effect sizes are small, but still significant for subjective well-being and psychological well-being, indicating that effects are fairly sustainable. Heterogeneity was rather high, due to the wide diversity of the studies included. Several variables moderated the impact on depression: Interventions were more effective if they were of longer duration, if recruitment was conducted via referral or hospital, if interventions were delivered to people with certain psychosocial problems and on an individual basis, and if the study design was of low quality. Moreover, indications for publication bias were found, and the quality of the studies varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis show that positive psychology interventions can be effective in the enhancement of subjective well-being and psychological well-being, as well as in helping to reduce depressive symptoms. Additional high-quality peer-reviewed studies in diverse (clinical) populations are needed to strengthen the evidence-base for positive psychology interventions. BioMed Central 2013-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC3599475/ /pubmed/23390882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-119 Text en Copyright ©2013 Bolier et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bolier, Linda
Haverman, Merel
Westerhof, Gerben J
Riper, Heleen
Smit, Filip
Bohlmeijer, Ernst
Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_full Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_fullStr Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_full_unstemmed Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_short Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
title_sort positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3599475/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23390882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-119
work_keys_str_mv AT bolierlinda positivepsychologyinterventionsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT havermanmerel positivepsychologyinterventionsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT westerhofgerbenj positivepsychologyinterventionsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT riperheleen positivepsychologyinterventionsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT smitfilip positivepsychologyinterventionsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies
AT bohlmeijerernst positivepsychologyinterventionsametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledstudies