Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35001513›Full record

Trial reportApplied psychology. Health and well-being2022

Do beliefs in the malleability of well-being affect the efficacy of positive psychology interventions? Results of a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Fabian Gander, René T Proyer, Willibald Ruch

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Applied psychology. Health and well-being, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fabian GanderDepartment of Psychology, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2204-8828
René T ProyerDepartment of Psychology, Martin-Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7426-4939
Willibald RuchDepartment of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-5368-3616

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study examines the role of beliefs about the malleability of well-being in a randomized, placebo-controlled, online positive psychology intervention targeting 267 German-speaking adults (83% women, mean age = 43.16 years). The participants of the experimental group ("three good things" intervention) and placebo control group ("early memories") reported their levels of happiness before and immediately after the 1-week intervention, as well as 2, 4, and 12 weeks after the intervention. Furthermore, the researchers recorded how participants completed the exercises and to what extent they liked the exercises. This study also assesses the participants' beliefs surrounding two different aspects of malleability (well-being is modifiable in general, and one knows how to change their well-being). Although both aspects of malleability were strongly intercorrelated, beliefs about how to change one's well-being seemed particularly relevant in the context of positive psychology interventions: Those who reported a stronger belief about how to change their well-being liked the intervention better and more often completed the activity as instructed. Further, they reported greater increases in well-being as compared with the control group. We conclude that beliefs about the malleability of well-being might represent an important moderating variable in the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions.

Indexed as

HappinessPsychology, PositiveAdultFemaleHumansMalechange beliefsgrowth mindsetonline interventionpositive psychology interventionrandomized placebo-controlled studywell-being

Identifiers

PMID35001513
PMCPMC9788089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.