The Relationship Among the Components of Self-compassion: A Pilot Study Using a Compassionate Writing Intervention to Enhance Self-kindness, Common Humanity, and Mindfulness

By Aljoscha Dreisoerner, N. Junker, Rolf van Dick. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2020

107 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Self-compassion has been theorized to have three components, each with a positive pole and a negative pole: self-kindness versus self-judgment, common humanity versus isolation, and mindfulness versus over-identification. Neff (Self Identity 2:85–101, 2003a) proposes that they mutually influence each other, however, this proposition has not been tested yet. We conducted a pilot study to see if improvements from training one component spilled over to the other two—and whether these trainings had an impact on well-being. 80 participants completed 8 weeks of self-compassionate writing exercises to enhance either self-kindness, common humanity, or mindfulness. Trait self-compassion was assessed using the six-factor model of the self-compassion scale. To address issues of alpha-error-inflation, the false discovery rate was fixed at 5%, and critical p values were adjusted accordingly. Participants in the mindfulness condition reported increased total self-compassion (p = .009), which was accompanied by increased self-kindness (p = .027) and lower isolation (p = .045). Participants in the common humanity condition reported improved total self-compassion (p = .018), lower over-identification (p = .045), and higher life-satisfaction (p = .049). The training in self-kindness failed to improve self-kindness or any other factor. These findings provide initial evidence that the components of self-compassion mutually enhance each other. They also emphasize the importance of mindfulness within the conceptualization of self-compassion.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/85e2006f75128619e0f40938b8f4369db439af82

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

  1. Marissa C. Knox
  2. O. Davidson
  3. István Tóth‐Király
  4. A. Kuchar
  5. K. Neff
  6. C. Germer
  7. F. Sirois
  8. Mark R. Leary

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

  1. O. Davidson
  2. Marissa C. Knox
  3. István Tóth‐Király
  4. A. Kuchar
  5. K. Neff
  6. C. Germer
  7. F. Raes
  8. Mark R. Leary

Citations in the corpus