Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37035539›Full record

ArticleInfant and child development

Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence following mindfulness training.

Jovita T Leung, Blanca Piera Pi-Sunyer, Saz P Ahmed, Lucy Foulkes, Cait Griffin, Ashok Sakhardande, Marc Bennett, Darren L Dunning, Kirsty Griffiths, Jenna Parker and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infant and child development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Jovita T LeungInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience University College London London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1577-9243
Blanca Piera Pi-SunyerDepartment of Psychology University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6707-9943
Saz P AhmedInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience University College London London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3533-409X
Lucy FoulkesThe Anna Freud Centre London UK.
Cait GriffinInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience University College London London UK.
Ashok SakhardandeInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience University College London London UK.
Marc BennettMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Darren L DunningMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Kirsty GriffithsMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Jenna ParkerMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Willem KuykenDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.
J Mark G WilliamsDepartment of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford UK.
Tim DalgleishMedical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Sarah-Jayne BlakemoreDepartment of Psychology University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1690-2805
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBAnna Freud Centre · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00030/5Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mindfulness training programmes have shown to encourage prosocial behaviours and reduce antisocial tendencies in adolescents. However, less is known about whether training affects susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence. The current study investigated the effect of mindfulness training (compared with an active control) on self-reported prosocial and antisocial tendencies and susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence. 465 adolescents aged 11-16 years were randomly allocated to one of two training programmes. Pre- and post-training, participants completed a social influence task. Self-reported likelihood of engaging in prosocial and antisocial behaviours did not change post-training, and regardless of training group, participants showed a higher propensity for prosocial influence than for antisocial influence. Finally, participants were less influenced by antisocial ratings following both training programmes.

Indexed as

adolescencemindfulnesssocial influence

Identifiers

PMID37035539
PMCPMC10078582
OpenAlexW4311517666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.