Preventing Depression through Selflessness: Effects and Mechanisms of Attentional vs. Deconstructive Meditation in a Three–Arm Randomized Controlled Trial
This randomized controlled trial examined mechanisms underlying meditation-induced changes in self-related processes and compared attentional and deconstructive meditation. The objectives were to (1) examine whether components of selflessness mediate the effects of meditation on dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat, and depressive symptoms, and (2) compare the effects and mechanisms of attentional and deconstructive meditation.
Method
Participants (n = 147) were randomly assigned to focused-attention meditation (FA), self-inquiry meditation (SI), and wait-list control (WL). Pre- and post-intervention self-reports assessed dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat, and depressive symptoms. Mediators included connectedness to humanity, connectedness to nature, and cognitive decentering, reflecting components of selflessness.
Results
Significant time × condition interactions were observed for all outcome variables. Both FA and SI led to greater reductions in depressive symptoms and identity threat compared to WL, with no significant differences between FA and SI. FA produced significantly greater reductions in dysfunctional attitudes than both SI and WL. Both active conditions showed greater increases in cognitive decentering than WL. Time × condition interactions for connectedness to humanity and nature were not significant; however, exploratory within-group analyses indicated significant pre-post increases only in the SI condition. Mediation analyses revealed within-condition and exploratory mechanisms: FA effects were primarily mediated by cognitive decentering, whereas SI effects on identity threat were mediated by changes in connectedness.
Conclusions
Attentional and deconstructive meditation practices yield comparable benefits for depression-related outcomes but operate through partially distinct mechanisms. Cognitive decentering played a central mechanism in attentional meditation while deconstructive practice showed exploratory associations with connectedness, warranting cautious interpretation. This study is not preregistered.
Since its introduction to the Western world, meditation has been widely studied for its mental health benefits, particularly its effectiveness in alleviating depression (e.g., Klainin-Yobas et al., 2012). Beyond symptom reduction, contemporary research increasingly seeks to identify the mechanisms of action through which meditative practices exert their effects. In parallel, a growing body of work emphasizes that meditation is not a unitary intervention, but rather a family of practices involving distinct cognitive and experiential processes. Together, these two lines of research highlight the need to both clarify how meditation works and to disentangle the specific effects associated with different meditation styles.
To fully appreciate the relevance of these meditation approaches, it is necessary to revisit the cognitive and self-related processes that underlie depression. The machinery of depression is characterized by rigid and negative cognitive schemas about the self, others, and the future (Beck, 1967; Dozois & Beck, 2008), as well as negative biases in information processing (Disner et al., 2011) that reinforce symptoms. More recently, identity threat appraisal, defined as the perception that one’s self-concept is being undermined or devalued, has been identified as a central factor in the development of depression (Berjot & Gillet, 2011; Graupmann, 2018; Petriglieri, 2011; Stinus & Berjot, 2024). Prior findings suggest that dysfunctional attitudes act as a filter, amplifying the perception of threat and worsening depressive symptoms. Strikingly, individuals high in dysfunctional attitudes not only perceived threat in overtly negative scenarios but also reported feeling threatened and distressed even in situations framed as successful (Stinus & Berjot, 2024). In such cases, reality appears to perpetually unfold under a looming cloud, continuously fueling and reinforcing depressive symptoms. Clarifying the role of identity threat thus holds promise for refining therapeutic strategies aimed at reducing vulnerability and preventing the onset of depression.
Mindfulness-based interventions are widely recognized for their effectiveness in targeting key cognitive vulnerabilities linked to depression, including dysfunctional attitudes (e.g., Docteur et al., 2020), negative automatic thoughts (e.g., Kaviani et al., 2012), and rumination (e.g., Perestelo-Perez et al., 2017). A central mechanism underlying these benefits is cognitive decentering, which allows individuals to observe thoughts and emotions from a more detached perspective, thereby reducing the impact of negative thinking and emotional reactivity (van der Velden et al., 2015). Alongside this, selflessness, considered a central outcome of meditation and a cornerstone of the Buddhist path to liberation from suffering (Anālayo, 2003; Dalaï-Lama, 2003), may offer additional explanatory power, particularly in understanding how meditation fosters emotional resilience.
According to 2500-year-old Buddhist teachings, the belief in a permanent and independent self is considered an illusion that fosters attachment to identity, beliefs, or possessions, and creates ongoing resistance to the impermanence of reality, which is viewed as a primary source of suffering (Varela et al., 2017). Meditation is traditionally viewed as a means of dissolving this illusion by cultivating insight into the impermanent and interconnected nature of experience, including the self (Anālayo, 2003; Thera, 1962). In contemporary psychological terms, this process has been conceptualized as selflessness, notably within the Self-Centered/Selflessness Happiness Model (Dambrun & Ricard, 2011; David et al., 2025). In this framework, selflessness is defined in accordance with this model rather than as a direct operationalization of the Buddhist notion of anattā (no-self). More specifically, selflessness refers to a psychological structure grounded in three interrelated foundations: interdependence, impermanence, and an outsider or decentered perspective on experience. Importantly, this model does not posit a complete dissolution of the self but rather a reduction in self-centered processing and rigid self-boundaries. Consistent with this theoretical background, selflessness can be operationalized through cognitive decentering and two indicators of interdependence (connectedness to humanity and connectedness to nature). The impermanence dimension remains difficult to assess due to the limited availability of validated measurement tools. Accordingly, such an operationalization should be understood as a partial and pragmatic approximation of selflessness, rather than a direct assessment of no-self or self-dissolution as described in Buddhist philosophy. Although empirical research on meditation-induced selflessness remains limited, preliminary findings suggest that meditation practices may reduce perceived self-boundaries and enhance interconnectedness, with beneficial effects on well-being (Aspy & Proeve, 2017; Dambrun, 2016; Dambrun et al., 2019; Hanley et al., 2020; Nisbet et al., 2019). Building on this framework, it becomes important to examine whether meditation fosters selflessness and whether this process mediates changes in dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat appraisal, and depressive symptoms.
To explore this question more thoroughly, we examined whether different types of meditation differed in their ability to cultivate selflessness. As previously mentioned, meditation encompasses a wide range of practices, each with distinct goals and underlying mechanisms of action. Contemporary frameworks (e.g., Dahl et al., 2015) categorize these into three broad families: attentional, constructive, and deconstructive. While attentional and constructive techniques are widely used in clinical interventions, deconstructive practices, despite their theoretical relevance for transforming rigid self-related processes, remain underexplored in empirical research. Focused attention meditation is the most extensively studied among attentional practices and is a core component of mindfulness-based programs. These techniques involve sustaining attention on a chosen object (e.g., the breath), monitoring distractions, and returning attention when the mind wanders (Hasenkamp et al., 2012; Lutz et al., 2015). Cognitive decentering is the primary mechanism underlying these attentional practices (Dahl et al., 2015). Most research on mindfulness and depression has focused on these techniques, highlighting a bias that leaves the broader effects of other meditation styles largely unexplored.
Paradoxically, the deconstructive family of meditative practices is among the most relevant for challenging rigid self-conceptions (Dahl et al., 2015) and yet remains one of the least explored in scientific literature (García-Campayo et al., 2023; Montero-Marin et al., 2016). This category includes practices such as non-dual meditation, insight meditation, analytical meditation, and self-inquiry, all aimed at deepening awareness of the nature of thoughts, emotions, beliefs, and consciousness (Chaudhary, 2023; Kumar et al., 2023). Self-inquiry, considered a central mechanism in this family, encourages meditators to observe mental events and question their origins and effects (e.g., “Where does this thought come from?” or “What response does it trigger?”). This introspective process invites the practitioner to investigate the self and dissolve habitual identifications, aligning with philosophical and spiritual traditions that emphasize uncovering the true nature of the mind (Chaudhary, 2023; Swami, 2016; Yogananda, 2005). Deconstructive practices may also involve discursive analysis, whereby individuals identify and critically evaluate maladaptive beliefs (e.g., “I am a failure”) to reduce their emotional impact. In this way, they share similarities with cognitive therapy, particularly in targeting dysfunctional thought patterns and their influence on emotions and behavior (Beck, 1979; Leufke et al., 2013).
While deconstructive meditation is well established in theoretical and philosophical literature as a path to selflessness and the cessation of suffering, empirical research, particularly randomized controlled trials, remains scarce. Nonetheless, emerging evidence suggests that these practices may be particularly effective in addressing self-related processes implicated in depression. Neuroscientific studies have shown that non-dual meditation, which dissolves the perceived boundary between self and other, alters brain activity linked to self-perception, reduces excessive self-evaluation, and softens rigid body boundaries (Josipovic, 2014; Mills et al., 2020; Van Lutterveld et al., 2017). Similarly, Gao et al. (2023) found that long-term self-inquiry practice reduces brain activity in response to self-images and enhances theta power and coherence, suggesting greater cognitive flexibility and detachment from the self. On a psychological level, self-inquiry programs have been associated with reductions in depression, anxiety, and interpersonal sensitivity (Leufke et al., 2013), as well as increases in mindfulness, self-awareness, and social connectedness (Goldberg et al., 2020), key indicators of selfless psychological functioning (Dambrun & Ricard, 2011). Taken together, these findings point to the potential of deconstructive practices as tools for fostering selflessness and preventing depression. Building on this foundation, a further objective is to compare the effects of attentional and deconstructive meditation on both mechanisms of change and depression-related outcomes.
The present study employed a three-arm randomized controlled design in which participants were assigned to a focused-attention (FA) meditation condition, a self-inquiry (SI) meditation condition, or a wait-list (WL) control group. The primary aim was to examine whether meditation-induced changes in selflessness-related processes (i.e., connectedness and cognitive decentering) mediate improvements in depression-related outcomes, and whether these mechanisms differ across meditation styles. Outcomes included dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat appraisal, and depressive symptoms. Drawing on contemporary contemplative science frameworks that distinguish meditation families by their primary mechanisms of action (Dahl et al., 2015), we formulated theory-driven and exploratory hypotheses. In particular, deconstructive practices are theorized to target cognitive reification and rigid self-representations more directly than attentional practices, which primarily cultivate attentional regulation and meta-awareness. On this basis, we expected both meditation conditions to produce pre–post improvements relative to the wait-list. Specifically, we hypothesized that (H1) SI would be associated with larger reductions in dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat, and depressive symptoms than FA and WL, with FA outperforming WL; (H2) SI would yield greater increases in connectedness to humanity and nature than FA and WL; (H3) both SI and FA would increase cognitive decentering relative to WL; and (H4) outcome changes would be primarily mediated by cognitive decentering in FA, whereas SI effects would involve a broader set of selflessness-related processes. Given the limited number of direct comparative studies, these hypotheses were formulated as theoretically motivated and exploratory rather than confirmatory.
Method
Participants
Each group consisted of 49 participants, resulting in a total sample size of 147. In the FA condition, the mean age was 48.6 years (SD = 10.8), with eight males. The SI condition included six males, with a mean age of 45.8 years (SD = 15.8). Finally, the WL condition had a mean age of 43.9 years (SD = 14.6) and included eight males. The sample size calculation was based on the meta-analysis by Lv et al. (2020) on the pre-to-post effects of meditation on depressive symptoms, which reported an average effect size of 0.4. Using G*Power (Faul et al., 2007), it was determined that a total sample size of 72 participants would be sufficient to detect a small-to-medium effect (d = 0.40) with 0.80 power and α = 0.05 using a 3 (condition) × 2 (pre–post training) mixed factorial ANOVA. Considering an average attrition rate of 30% in this type of study (Linardon, 2023), we estimated the minimum sample size for this study to be 94 participants.
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Participants were selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure a well-defined study population. Inclusion criteria required participants to be adults (18 years and older), affiliated with or beneficiaries of a social security system, and willing to participate in the study. Exclusion criteria included undergoing psychotropic treatment, a prior diagnosis of depression by a healthcare professional, any psychiatric diagnosis, being experienced meditators or regular meditation practitioners, being pregnant or breastfeeding, or being under legal protection (guardianship, curatorship, or judicial protection). These criteria ensured the study sample was appropriate and safe.
Participant Flow
Out of the 286 individuals who expressed interest, 26 were found ineligible based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most of them were either experienced meditators or regular meditation practitioners, or had a history of depression or another psychiatric diagnosis. Additionally, 20 individuals declined to participate. In total, 240 participants returned their informed consent. During the approximately 2-month lapse of time between participants providing informed consent and the administration of the pretest questionnaire at time 1 (1 week prior to protocol commencement), 36 participants dropped out of the process. Consequently, a total of 204 participants were randomized into the three conditions. This high rate of attrition between providing informed consent and completing the pre-treatment assessment was mostly due to logistical constraints: the principal investigator was the sole experimenter and therefore could not offer a wide range of time slots for the group sessions. As a result, many participants were unavailable at the scheduled times and chose not to proceed with the study. In addition, 17 participants (eight in FA, nine in SI) abandoned before attending the first session, and 11 after the second session (six in FA, five in SI). Most participants withdrew due to scheduling conflicts with work or a lack of commitment to practice, while some of them dropped out without providing any explanations. At the end, 147 participants (49 in FA, 49 in SI, and 49 in WL) completed both the pre- and post-tests, enabling us to analyze their data (see Fig. 1 for the CONSORT flowchart). Between the pre- and post-tests, four participants were lost to follow-up in the FA group, five in the SI group, and 20 in the WL group. Between the pre- and post-tests, attrition was unevenly distributed across conditions, with four participants lost to follow-up in the FA group, five in the SI group, and 20 in the WL group. This higher dropout rate in the wait-list condition likely reflects reduced engagement associated with the absence of an active intervention and may introduce attrition-related bias. However, baseline analyses indicated no significant differences between groups on demographic variables or outcome measures at time 1. This limitation is considered in the interpretation of the results.
Fig. 1
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flow chart.
Note: FA focused attention, SI self-inquiry
The study began in April 2022 and was conducted over an 18-month period. Ethical approval was obtained from an independent committee in compliance with national regulatory standards, prior to the initiation of participant recruitment. For recruitment, study information was disseminated through social media platforms, university campuses, and the investigators’ professional networks using a dedicated flyer. Prospective participants then engaged in phone conversations with the principal investigator to receive additional details, address inquiries, and confirm adherence to inclusion and exclusion criteria. All eligible participants who agreed to take part in the study were sent duplicate copies of the information letter and informed consent form via postal mail. Upon receiving the documents, participants signed the informed consent form and returned one copy to the investigator using the provided pre-stamped envelope. The pretest questionnaire (T1) was then sent to all participants who returned the informed consent form 1 week before the protocol commencement. Randomization was conducted electronically using REDCap’s randomization module after participants completed the pretest questionnaire (T1). The allocation sequence was computer-generated using simple randomization with a 1:1:1 ratio across the three conditions (FA, SI, and WL). Although the randomization was performed by the first author, participants were blind to their assigned condition, and allocation was concealed until after pretest completion. Only participants allocated to the wait-list group were informed of their placement on a wait-list due to elevated enrollment. They were duly informed of the necessity to complete the questionnaire again after a 1-month interval. Additionally, they were offered the provision to receive notifications regarding any prospective meditation protocols organized in the future.
For participants enrolled in the meditation groups, the meditation protocol began about 1 week after questionnaire distribution, with weekly online group meditation sessions via Zoom. The meditation protocol lasted 4 weeks and comprised a total of five online group meditation sessions, all led by the principal investigator. Each lasted 60 min and maintained the same structure for both meditation groups. During the first session, each participant received an accompanying brochure via email, developed collaboratively with a certified and experienced meditation instructor. Participants were instructed to engage in individual meditation practice for 20 min daily, 5 days a week, with all necessary instructions and audio recordings provided in the brochure. At the end of the meditation protocol, each participant, including those in the wait-list group, received a post-test questionnaire (T2) via email, with a 7-day window for completion. The questionnaire mirrored the scales administered at T1, with additional questions related to attendance and home practice (except for the wait-list group participants). A unique code was assigned to each participant to link pretest and post-test data, ensuring the anonymity of the dataset.
Interventions
The two meditation protocols were designed to be comparable; the structures of the weekly group sessions and the brochures were identical, with only the content varying. Each session comprised two 15-min guided meditations, separated by a 15-min discussion period. This discussion period allowed participants to ask questions, share their experiences, and discuss any difficulties encountered during home practice. The first 5 min of the session was dedicated to welcoming participants, while the concluding 10 min was used to reinforce instructions for home practice. Each participant received an electronic brochure containing guidance and guidelines for autonomous home practice. Pre-recorded sessions (10–20 min) were conveniently accessible online through the brochure, with all audio content downloadable onto computers or mobile devices. In addition to engaging in formal practice through audio sessions, both groups were provided with instructions on integrating informal mindfulness practices into their daily routines. Finally, the principal investigator remained readily available daily to address any participant inquiries via email.
Focused Attention Condition
To rigorously adhere to the characteristics of attentional practices, we exclusively employed breath meditation and body scan techniques during the online group sessions for the FA condition. The instructions provided in this condition included: “Observe the breath as it naturally flows in and out, paying attention to its qualities,” and “If distractions arise—whether from thoughts, sensations, or external noises—acknowledge them without judgment and gently redirect your focus back to the breath.” For home practice, we supplied guided audio recordings for both breath meditation and the body scan as formal practices. Additionally, we encouraged participants to engage in two informal exercises daily. The first, titled “Stop and Breathe,” prompts participants to integrate short meditation breaks into their day, lasting anywhere from 30 s to 3 min. The key is to cultivate the habit of focusing on the breath to reconnect with the present moment. The second exercise, “Train Your Attention Muscle,” involves monitoring when the mind begins to wander. Upon noticing thoughts drifting toward uncomfortable topics or experiencing mental chatter, participants are instructed to refocus their attention on the breath for just 10 to 15 s. This brief practice serves to disrupt the flow of distracting thoughts and fosters greater presence and awareness in their current activities.
Self-inquiry Condition
For the SI condition, we implemented a fully secularized deconstructive meditation protocol, explicitly grounded in contemporary scientific models of meditation mechanisms rather than in any specific Buddhist or spiritual tradition. The intervention was designed in reference to the typology proposed by Dahl et al. (2015), which classifies meditation practices according to their primary mechanisms of action rather than their historical or doctrinal lineage. Within this framework, the SI condition was situated in the deconstructive family of meditation practices, whose central mechanism is self-inquiry aimed at eliciting insight into the dynamics of perception, cognition, emotion, and self-related processes. Although SI sessions began with a brief period of breath-focused mindfulness, this attentional component served solely as a preparatory scaffold to stabilize attention and support subsequent inquiry, rather than as a training objective in itself. Participants were then guided through an open-awareness phase followed by structured self-inquiry prompts (e.g., “Where does this experience originate?”; “How is it constructed?”; “What sense of self does it evoke or reinforce?”). These instructions correspond to object- and subject-oriented insight practices within the deconstructive family described by Dahl et al. (2015), which involve investigating mental events and patterns of identification in order to reduce cognitive reification. Importantly, although these processes may share functional similarities with practices found in vipassanā traditions (e.g., satipaṭṭhāna), the present SI protocol was intentionally secularized and did not include Buddhist teachings, doctrinal references, or spiritual framing. Accordingly, SI was implemented as a distinct deconstructive meditation practice, designed to differ from attentional meditation in its primary mechanism of action and intended psychological effects.
Additionally, we encouraged participants to engage in a brief daily informal exercise titled “STOP, I Contemplate.” This practice consisted in pausing during daily life to observe and question the ongoing mental content in line with the self-inquiry instructions introduced during the group sessions. Specifically, participants were invited to identify current thoughts, emotions, or self-referential narratives, and then reflect on their validity, origin, and impermanence. Whether it lasted for 30 s, 1 min, or 3 min, the duration was secondary. The key was not simply to observe present-moment experiences, but to cultivate an intimate familiarity with the functioning of the mind—by investigating how thoughts, emotions, and self-referential narratives arise, solidify, and dissolve through habitual patterns of identification and belief.
Measures
Outcome Variables
Depressive symptoms were measured using the seven items from the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983). Participants responded to each item on a 4-point ordinal scale (αTime 1 = 0.72, αTime 2 = 0.76).
Dysfunctional attitudes were assessed using the short form of the Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale (Beevers et al., 2007) initially developed by Weissman and Beck (1978) and validated in the French context by Bouvard et al. (1994). This nine-item scale aims to measure maladaptive beliefs about themselves or their world related to depression. Participants were asked to answer each item (e.g., “If I fail at my work, then I am a failure as a person”; “I am nothing if a person I love doesn’t love me”) using a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree) (αTime 1 = 0.85, αTime 2 = 0.78).
Identity threat was evaluated using the Threat Appraisal Subscale of the Cognitive Appraisal Scale (Skinner & Brewer, 2002; French version by Berjot & Girault-Lidvan, 2009). This subscale assesses the tendency to perceive threats in social situations, specifically measuring the perceived threats to self-esteem and identity, such as negative evaluation and overt rejection. It consists of 10 items (e.g., “I am concerned that others will find fault with me,” “I am concerned that others will not approve of me”), with responses rated on a 5-point Likert scale (α = 0.94) ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) (αTime 1 = 0.93, αTime 2 = 0.94).
Mediator Variables
Cognitive decentering was assessed using the Metacognitive Processes of Decentering Trait scale (Hanley et al., 2020; French validation De Oliveira et al., 2024). This 15-item scale yields an overall score that indicates how well individuals can shift their experiential perspective from being deeply involved in their internal experience (i.e., first-person perspective) to observing it objectively from a psychological distance (i.e., third-person perspective). Participants were asked to complete each item (e.g., “I am able to watch myself thinking”; “I can observe unpleasant thoughts and feelings without trying to change them”) using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never or very rarely true) to 5 (very often or always true) (αTime 1 = 0.93, αTime 2 = 0.95).
Connectedness to nature was measured using the Connectedness to Nature Scale (Mayer & Frantz, 2004; French validation Navarro et al., 2017), developed to capture the individual’s intuitive feeling of being connected to the natural world, in its widest and most conceptual sense (e.g., “I think of the natural world as a community to which I belong”; “I often feel part of the web of life”). Participants were asked to answer the 11 items using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree) (αTime 1 = 0.92, αTime 2 = 0.93).
Connectedness to humanity was assessed using the Connectedness to Humanity scale (Stinus et al., 2025), designed to parallel the Connectedness to Nature Scale (Mayer & Frantz, 2004). The 10-item scale captures the intuitive sense of connection with others at the broadest level of the human system (e.g., “I often feel a sense of oneness with the human beings around me”; “I often feel connected with other human beings”). Participants were asked to answer each item using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree) (αTime 1 = 0.88, αTime 2 = 0.91).
Manipulation Check Variables
Attendance was monitored by asking participants how many group sessions they had attended (responses ranged from 0 to 5).
Home practice score was calculated for each participant by averaging the reported frequency of formal and informal practices across the intervention period, using a 5-point scale (0 = never to 4 = every day). This score served as a manipulation check to evaluate participants’ engagement with the intervention outside of the formal group sessions.
Data Analyses
As preliminary analyses, we conducted descriptive statistics and one-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) to examine potential baseline differences between groups on outcome and mediator variables. For the categorical variable gender, we conducted a chi-square test of independence to assess group equivalence. Additionally, we conducted manipulation check analyses to assess participant attendance and home practice in the two active conditions. Two indices were calculated: a mean attendance score (based on participation in live and replayed group sessions) and a mean home practice score (based on the reported frequency of engagement with the formal and informal practices specific to each condition). Independent-samples t-tests were used to compare the FA and SI groups on these two variables. As the wait-list group did not receive any intervention, they were not included in these analyses.
Secondly, to assess the differential impact of the interventions, we conducted a 3 (condition: SI vs. FA vs. WL) × 2 (time: pretest, post-test) repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) on the outcome and mediator variables. The primary goal of this analysis was to test for condition × time interaction effects, which indicate whether changes over time differed significantly across groups. Where significant interactions were found, we conducted follow-up analyses to explore within-group pre–post changes and interpret the nature of the observed effects. Thirdly, to explore the mechanisms underlying changes in outcome variables, we conducted mediation analyses separately within each active condition using the MEMORE macro (model 1; Montoya, 2024). This approach is specifically designed for repeated-measures (pretest–post-test) designs and enables the estimation of indirect effects using bootstrapping procedures (5000 samples; 95% confidence interval). Mediator variables (i.e., connectedness to humanity, connectedness to nature, and cognitive decentering) were modeled separately rather than aggregated into a single global selflessness score. This analytic choice was motivated by theoretical models suggesting that attentional and deconstructive meditation practices rely on partially distinct experiential and cognitive mechanisms, and allowed us to examine practice-specific mediation pathways that may have been obscured by a unitary composite measure. All analyses were performed using SPSS software (version 28.0).
Finally, as a complementary and exploratory approach, we conducted between-group mediation analyses to examine whether group differences between each active meditation condition and the wait-list control were mediated by changes in selflessness-related components. Condition was entered as the independent variable using dummy-coded contrasts (FA vs. WL; SI vs. WL), with pre–post changes in connectedness to humanity, connectedness to nature, and cognitive decentering modeled as parallel mediators, and pre–post changes in outcome variables as dependent variables.
Results
Preliminary Analyses
Descriptive statistics and baseline group comparisons for sociodemographic variables, outcome measures, and proposed mediators are presented in Table 1. One-way ANOVAs and chi-square tests were conducted to assess whether the three groups differed significantly at baseline. There were no significant group differences in age, or in gender distribution, indicating that randomization was successful with regard to these sociodemographic characteristics. Similarly, no significant differences were observed between groups on any of the outcome variables at baseline, including dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat appraisal, and depressive symptoms. While the difference in depressive symptoms approached significance, the means across all groups remained low and within the non-clinical range. With regard to mediator variables, no significant baseline differences were found for connectedness to humanity, connectedness to nature, or cognitive decentering. Overall, these results suggest that the groups were comparable on all key measures prior to the intervention. Finally, manipulation check analyses were conducted using independent-samples t-tests on the two active conditions (FA and SI) to assess participant engagement. The mean attendance score, reflecting participation in live and replayed sessions, did not significantly differ between groups, t(96) = −1.52, p = 0.13. Similarly, the mean home practice frequency score, which measured engagement with formal and informal exercises specific to each intervention, did not significantly differ between FA and SI participants, t(96) = 1.11, p = 0.27. These findings suggest that both groups were comparably engaged with their respective interventions.
Table 1
Descriptive statistics and baseline group comparisons for sociodemographic and outcome and mediator variables
Wait-list condition (N = 49)
FA condition (N = 49)
SI condition (N = 49)
Test statistic (F; p value)
Sex (% female)
83.7%
85.7%
87.8%
(0.399; 0.82)
Mean (standard deviation)
Age
43.9 (14.60)
48.6 (10.80)
45.8 (15.80)
(1.72; 0.19)
Outcome variables
Dysfunctional attitudes
1.94 (0.57)
2.08 (0.55)
2.0 (0.58)
(0.79; 0.46)
Identity threat
3.56 (1.23)
3.55 (1.18)
3.46 (1.07)
(0.12; 0.88)
Depressive symptoms
0.96 (0.49)
0.73 (0.45)
0.81 (0.51)
(2.71; 0.07)
Mediator variables
Connectedness humanity
3.24 (0.7)
3.58 (0.68)
3.43 (0.85)
(2.62; 0.08)
Connectedness to Nature
3.53 (0.72)
3.85 (0.85)
3.85 (0.86)
(2.61; 0.08)
Cognitive decentering
2.85 (0.85)
2.78 (0.8)
2.87 (0.81)
(0.17; 0.85)
Manipulation check
Attendance
–
2.31 (0.78)
2.59 (1.05)
(−1.52; 0.13)
Home practice
–
1.29 (0.75)
1.14 (0.49)
(1.11; 0.27)
Items of Connectedness to Nature Scale, Connectedness to Humanity Scale, and Cognitive Decentering Scale are rated on a 5-point Likert scale; items of Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale are rated on a 4-point Likert scale; items of Identity Threat Scale are rated on a 6-point Likert scale; Attendance scores range from 0 to 5; Home practice scores range from 0 to 4; items of Depressive Symptoms subscale are rated on a scale ranging from 0 to 3
***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05
Group Differences: Time × Condition Interaction
To assess whether changes over time differed across groups, we conducted a 3 (condition: WL vs. FA vs. SI) × 2 (time: pretest, post-test) repeated measures MANOVA on all outcome and mediator variables. Where significant interactions were found, we conducted post hoc comparisons using Holm-adjusted p values and calculated Cohen’s d for effect sizes.
Outcome Variables
Dysfunctional Attitudes
Results indicated a significant time × condition interaction [F(2, 145) = 9.18, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.11]. As expected, the decrease in dysfunctional attitudes was significantly greater in the FA group (Mdiff = –0.39; pholm < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.77) than in the wait-list group (Mdiff = 0.02). Surprisingly, the decrease in dysfunctional attitudes was also significantly greater in the FA group (Mdiff = –0.39; pholm < 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.72) than in the SI group (Mdiff = –0.005), with no significant difference between the SI group and wait-list group (pholm > 0.10).
Identity Threat
The interaction effect between time and condition on identity threat was significant [F(2, 145) = 4.18, p = 0.02, ηp2 = 0.05]. The decrease in identity threat was significantly greater in FA (Mdiff = –0.57; pholm = 0.02, Cohen’s d = 0.54) and SI groups (Mdiff = –0.49; pholm = 0.05, Cohen’s d = 0.45) than in the wait-list group (Mdiff = –0.09). Contrary to our first hypothesis, there was no significant difference between the FA and SI groups (pholm > 0.10).
Depressive Symptoms
The ANOVA also revealed a significant interaction effect of depressive symptoms [F(2, 145) = 5.89, p = 0.003, ηp2 = 0.08]. The decrease in depressive symptoms was significantly greater in FA (Mdiff = –0.27; pholm = 0.04, Cohen’s d = 0.47) and SI groups (Mdiff = –0.37; pholm < 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.67) than in the wait-list group (Mdiff = –0.04). There was no significant difference between the FA and SI groups (pholm > 0.10).
These results do not support Hypothesis 1, as the SI condition did not outperform FA on any of the outcome measures. In fact, the FA condition demonstrated significantly greater reductions in dysfunctional attitudes than SI. Furthermore, the SI group did not differ significantly from the WL group in terms of dysfunctional attitudes.
Mediator Variables
Connectedness to Humanity
The interaction effect for connectedness to humanity was not significant [F(2, 145) = 2.43, p = 0.09, ηp2 = 0.032]. However, post hoc comparisons indicated greater increases in the SI (Mdiff = 0.28; pholm = 0.023, Cohen’s d = 0.52) and FA groups (Mdiff = 0.21; pholm = 0.002, Cohen’s d = 0.2) relative to WL (Mdiff = –0.03). No significant difference was found between FA and SI (pholm > 0.10).
Connectedness to Nature
Similarly, the interaction effect was not significant [F(2, 145) = 1.87, p = 0.16, ηp2 = 0.03]. Yet post hoc analyses showed a significantly greater increase in the SI group (Mdiff = 0.20; pholm = 0.002, Cohen’s d = 0.43) than WL, and a marginal effect in the FA group (Mdiff = 0.08; pholm = 0.06, Cohen’s d = 0.20). Again, there was no significant difference between FA and SI (pholm > 0.10).
Cognitive Decentering
A significant time × condition interaction was observed [F(2, 145) = 7.97, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.10]. Both FA (Mdiff = 0.74; pholm < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.78) and SI (Mdiff = 0.55; pholm < 0.05, Cohen’s d = 0.55) improved significantly more than WL (Mdiff = 0.11), with no significant difference between FA and SI (pholm > 0.10).
These findings partially support Hypothesis 2. While the time × condition interactions for connectedness to humanity and nature were not statistically significant, exploratory post hoc comparisons suggested that the SI condition showed greater improvements than the WL group on both variables and greater improvement than the FA group on connectedness to nature. Within-group analyses (see Supplementary Information) further clarify these trends: only the SI group exhibited statistically significant pre–post increases in both connectedness to humanity (d = 0.52, p < 0.001) and connectedness to nature (d = 0.43, p < 0.01). In contrast, the FA group showed a small, non-significant change in both connectedness to humanity (d = 0.20) and connectedness to nature (d = 0.06). These results suggest that SI had a more robust impact on interdependent self-related processes than FA, as initially hypothesized. Turning to Hypothesis 3, the significant time × condition interaction observed for cognitive decentering confirms that both active conditions effectively enhanced decentering relative to the wait-list group, with the largest gains observed in the FA group.
Mechanisms of Change
To investigate the mechanisms through which the interventions influenced depression-related outcomes, we conducted separate multiple mediation analyses for the FA and SI conditions using the MEMORE macro (model 1; Montoya, 2024). This approach, suitable for within-subject pre–post designs, allowed us to estimate indirect effects of changes in mediator variables (i.e., connectedness to humanity, connectedness to nature, and cognitive decentering) on changes in each outcome variable (dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat, and depressive symptoms) over time (see theoretical Fig. 2). Consequently, three separate multiple mediation analyses were performed, one for each outcome variable. Importantly, MEMORE models within-person change by internally estimating difference scores (T2 − T1) for both mediators and outcomes. For outcome variables where decreases reflect improvement (e.g., depressive symptoms, dysfunctional attitudes, and identity threat), positive indirect effects therefore indicate that increases in the mediator are associated with larger pre–post reductions in the outcome.
Fig. 2
Theoretical Multiple Mediation Model using a pretest–post-test design
The results are detailed in Table 2. For the FA condition, cognitive decentering emerged as the sole significant mediator of change, fully mediating changes in depressive symptoms and partially mediating changes in dysfunctional attitudes. No significant mediators were identified for identity threat in this condition. For the SI condition, the changes over time in identity threat were partially mediated by connectedness to humanity. Additionally, connectedness to nature emerged as a significant mediator; however, this indirect effect was negative, indicating that increases in connectedness to nature were associated with smaller reductions in identity threat over time. Given its counterintuitive direction and the absence of a clear theoretical account, this effect should be interpreted with caution. Finally, for changes in depressive symptoms over time, no mediators were found to be significant.
Table 2
Indirect, direct, and total effects of multiple mediation models
Indirect effect
Direct effect
Total effect
FA condition
Dysfunctional attitudes
t1 -> connectedness to humanity -> t2
t1 -> connectedness to nature -> t2
t1 -> cognitive decentering -> t2
b = –0.02 CI: –0.10, 0.06
b = –0.01 CI: –0.07, 0.04
b = 0.16 CI: 0.01, 0.34
b = 0.25 CI: 0.01, 0.49
b = 0.39 CI: 0.19, 0.58
Identity threat
t1 -> connectedness to humanity -> t2
t1 -> connectedness to nature -> t2
t1 -> cognitive decentering -> t2
b = 0.01 CI: –0.08, 0.18
b = –0.01 CI: –0.14, 0.06
b = 0.27 CI: –0.01, 0.63
b = 0.30 CI: –0.12, 0.72
b = 0.57 CI: 0.22, 0.92
Depressive symptoms
t1 -> connectedness to humanity -> t2
t1 -> connectedness to nature -> t2
t1 -> cognitive decentering -> t2
b = –0.02 CI: –0.10, 0.07
b = 0.003 CI: –0.03, 0.06
b = 0.12 CI: 0.007, 0.26
b = 0.16 CI: –0.05, 0.37
b = 0.27 CI: 0.10, 0.44
SI condition
Identity threat
t1 -> connectedness to humanity-> t2
t1 -> connectedness to nature -> t2
t1 -> cognitive decentering -> t2
b = 0.11 CI: 0.01, 0.21
b = –0.09 CI: –0.23, –0.004
b = 0.11 CI: –0.15, 0.38
b = 0.37 CI: 0.13, 0.62
b = 0.49 CI: 0.30, 0.68
Depressive symptoms
t1 -> connectedness to humanity -> t2
t1 -> connectedness to nature -> t2
t1 -> cognitive decentering -> t2
b = 0.005 CI: –0.05, 0.09
b = 0.0002 CI: –0.06, 0.05
b = 0.10 CI: –0.05, 0.27
b = 0.26 CI: 0.10, 0.43
b = 0.37 CI: 0.25, 0.49
An indirect effect is considered statistically significant if the confidence interval does not include 0. For outcome variables where decreases indicate improvement (i.e., depressive symptoms, dysfunctional attitudes, and identity threat), positive indirect effects reflect larger pre–post reductions in the outcome associated with increases in the mediator. Mediators identified are highlighted
Taken together, these findings suggest that attentional and deconstructive mediation practices may engage in different self-related processes. However, because mediation analyses were conducted separately within each intervention arm using a within-subject design, these results do not permit direct statistical comparisons of mediators between FA and SI. Accordingly, any claims regarding “distinct mechanisms” should be understood as exploratory and descriptive rather than confirmatory.
Results from the complementary between-group mediation analyses indicated that indirect effects at the between-group level were generally limited. No differential mediation effects emerged that would allow direct statistical comparisons between the FA and SI conditions. However, across outcomes, changes in cognitive decentering were consistently and strongly associated with reductions in dysfunctional attitudes, depressive symptoms, and identity threat. This pattern converges with the primary within-condition mediation analyses, suggesting that mechanisms of change are more robustly captured at the level of within-practice, within-person processes rather than by average between-group contrasts. Full statistical details are provided in Supplementary Information.
Discussion
This study sought to investigate whether selflessness-related processes mediate the effects of meditation on depression-related outcomes and whether attentional and deconstructive meditation practices engage distinct mechanisms of change. Rather than focusing solely on comparative efficacy, the study aimed to examine how different forms of meditation influence self-related processes implicated in depression vulnerability, including dysfunctional attitudes, identity threat appraisal, and depressive symptoms.
At the level of outcomes, both focused attention (FA) and self-inquiry (SI) meditation produced significant improvements relative to the wait-list condition in depressive symptoms and identity threat, with no reliable differences between the two active interventions. These findings suggest that, despite relying on partially different theoretical mechanisms, attentional and deconstructive practices may yield broadly comparable benefits for key depression-related outcomes in non-clinical samples. Notably, FA showed a stronger effect on dysfunctional attitudes than SI, a result that contrasts with our initial hypothesis and underscores the clinical relevance of attentional training for modifying rigid, depressogenic belief structures. Together, these results do not support a simple hierarchy of effectiveness between meditation styles and instead suggest overlapping therapeutic benefits.
With respect to selflessness-related processes, both meditation practices increased cognitive decentering relative to the wait-list group, confirming its role as a central transdiagnostic mechanism of meditation-based interventions. Changes in connectedness to humanity and nature were more nuanced: while no robust between-group differences emerged, exploratory within-group analyses indicated that increases in these interdependent self-related dimensions were observed primarily in the SI condition. This pattern suggests that deconstructive practices may be more closely associated with changes in interdependent aspects of self-experience, although these effects were modest and should be interpreted cautiously given the absence of significant interaction effects. Overall, these findings suggest similar outcome-level benefits across practices, with only modest and exploratory differentiation at the level of self-related processes.
At a mechanistic level, the within-condition mediation analyses suggest that the two practices may engage partially different self-related processes, although these patterns should be interpreted cautiously. In the FA condition, changes in outcomes were most consistently accounted for by increases in cognitive decentering, which aligns with contemporary models positioning decentering as a central mechanism of attentional meditation. In the SI condition, changes in identity threat were instead associated with connectedness-related variables, suggesting that deconstructive practice may preferentially mobilize shifts in how individuals relate to others and the natural world. Notably, no mediator accounted for changes in depressive symptoms in the SI condition, indicating that the pathways linking this practice to symptom change remain unclear in the present data. Importantly, because mediation models were estimated separately within each intervention arm using a within-subject design, these findings do not allow direct statistical comparisons of mediation effects between FA and SI; therefore, references to “distinct mechanisms” are best understood as exploratory and descriptive.
Future Perspectives and Limitations
Several findings warrant cautious interpretation and point to important directions for future research. One noteworthy and unexpected pattern concerned the role of connectedness to nature in relation to identity threat. In the SI condition, increases in connectedness to nature were associated with smaller reductions in identity threat. This counterintuitive effect converges with prior findings (Stinus et al., 2024, 2025), suggesting that when controlling for connectedness to humanity, connectedness to nature may be weakly or even positively associated with identity threat and depressive symptoms. Together, these observations indicate that different forms of connectedness may not be uniformly protective and may operate differently depending on individuals’ self-related profiles. Future research using person-centered approaches (e.g., cluster or latent profile analyses) would be valuable to clarify how these dimensions co-occur and for whom they are beneficial or detrimental. In addition, mediation analyses revealed that in the SI condition, none of the selflessness-related components accounted for reductions in depressive symptoms, suggesting that other mechanisms may be involved. One plausible interpretation, consistent with prior work highlighting the central role of identity threat in depression (Stinus & Berjot, 2024, 2026), is that reductions in identity threat may represent a downstream pathway linking SI to depressive symptom change. However, this possibility remains speculative and should be directly tested in future longitudinal or sequential mediation designs.
Finally, the absence of an effect of self-inquiry on dysfunctional attitudes contrasts with theoretical accounts suggesting that deconstructive practices are well suited to challenge maladaptive cognitive patterns (Dahl et al., 2015). Several non-exclusive explanations may account for this discrepancy. First, in line with common practices in mindfulness-based interventions, spiritual and religious elements were intentionally excluded to minimize confounding factors and isolate core psychological mechanisms. However, deconstructive meditation may rely more heavily than attentional practices on insight processes supported by ethical and spiritual frameworks traditionally embedded in Buddhist teachings. When stripped of this broader interpretative context, deconstructive practices may lose part of their transformative potential, particularly for deeply entrenched and possibly implicit self-related cognitive structures. From this perspective, the limited impact of SI on dysfunctional attitudes may reflect a mismatch between the depth of the targeted processes and the secular, time-limited format of the intervention. Second, dysfunctional attitudes are increasingly understood as multi-layered constructs shaped by both explicit and implicit processes (Allport, 1933; Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006; Wilson et al., 2000). Recent empirical work highlights that many attitude-related processes operate largely outside conscious awareness (Elimari, 2023; Elimari & Lafargue, 2023a, 2024). Because self-report measures primarily capture reflective and consciously accessible components, meditation, particularly deconstructive practices, may influence deeper, more automatic processes that participants are unable to explicitly articulate. This limitation likely extends to other self-related constructs assessed here, including connectedness, which may partly rely on automatic cognitive systems (Elimari & Lafargue, 2020, 2023b). Future research would therefore benefit from incorporating implicit or physiological measures to better capture changes occurring at different levels of processing.
While this study contributes valuable insights to the field of contemplative science, several limitations must be considered. Firstly, our sample predominantly consisted of female participants, which may limit the generalizability of the results to a broader population. This gender imbalance could influence outcomes, as documented differences in responses to meditation practices and self-reported measures exist between genders. Secondly, we relied exclusively on self-reported measures to assess outcomes and mediators, which may introduce biases related to social desirability or self-perception, potentially skewing the results. Future research could benefit from incorporating objective measures alongside self-reports to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of the effects of meditation practices. Thirdly, our study did not include a follow-up assessment to investigate the long-term effects of the FA and SI conditions. Longitudinal data could provide insight into the sustainability of the benefits associated with each meditation practice and allow for comparisons of long-term effects between the practices. Fourthly, participant attrition, particularly in the wait-list condition, represents an important limitation. The higher dropout rate observed in the wait-list group may have affected group comparability and introduced attrition-related bias, despite baseline equivalence across conditions. This limitation is common in wait-list-controlled behavioral intervention studies but nonetheless warrants caution in interpreting between-group effects. Lastly, the advertisement of our protocol as a meditation-based program may have introduced sampling bias. Participants who self-selected into the study were likely already receptive to meditation practices, which could influence their responses and limit the applicability of our findings to individuals who are less familiar or engaged with meditation. By acknowledging these limitations, we aim to frame future research directions and enhance the robustness of findings in the field of contemplative science.
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the meditation experts—Matthieu Ricard, Michael Dambrun, Nicolas Pellerin, Liudmila Gamaiunova, and Pierre Gallez—for their invaluable assistance in conceiving the distinct protocol used in this study. Their insights and expertise greatly enriched the research process. We also extend our heartfelt thanks to Amanda Montoya for her support with statistical analyses and for granting us access to the latest beta version of MEMORE, which played a crucial role in this work. Finally, the first and corresponding author gratefully acknowledge the Fundación Universidad Villanueva for its financial support during the valorization and dissemination of the present work.
Declarations
Ethics Approval
French Committee for the Protection of Persons (approval number: ID-RCB 2021-A02677-3) on December 5, 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05285488.
Informed Consent
All participants received detailed information about the study’s objectives, procedures, duration, and data management before enrollment. They were informed that participation was voluntary, that they could withdraw at any time without justification or consequences, and that their responses would remain confidential and anonymized. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their inclusion in the study.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Preventing Depression through Selflessness: Effects and Mechanisms of Attentional vs. Deconstructive Meditation in a Three–Arm Randomized Controlled Trial
Allport, G. W. (1933). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 798–844). Clark University Press.
Anālayo, B. (2003). Satipaṭṭhāna: The direct path to realization. Windhorse.
Aspy, D. J., & Proeve, M. (2017). Mindfulness and loving-kindness meditation: Effects on connectedness to humanity and to the natural world. Psychological Reports,120(1), 102–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294116685867CrossRef
Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Clinical, experimental, and theoretical aspects. Harper & Row.
Beck, A. T. (1979). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. Penguin.
Beevers, C. G., Strong, D. R., Meyer, B., Pilkonis, P. A., & Miller, I. W. (2007). Efficiently assessing negative cognition in depression: An item response theory analysis of the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale. Psychological Assessment,19(2), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.19.2.199CrossRefPubMed
Berjot, S., & Girault-Lidvan, N. (2009). Validation d’une version française de l’échelle d’évaluation cognitive primaire de Brewer et Skinner. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science = Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement,41(4), 252–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014842CrossRef
Bouvard, M., Cottraux, J., & Charles, S. (1994). Etude de validation sur une population française de l’échelle d’attitudes dysfonctionnelles de Weissman et Beck (DAS-forme A). Journal De Thérapie Comportementale Et Cognitive,4, 127–135.
Chaudhary, B. S. (2023). Self-inquiry and the nature of consciousness in contemporary thought. Humanities and Social Science Studies,12(2), 198–207.
Dahl, C. J., Lutz, A., & Davidson, R. J. (2015). Reconstructing and deconstructing the self: Cognitive mechanisms in meditation practice. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,19(9), 515–523.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Dalaï-Lama. (2003). Transformer son esprit. Le Livre de Poche.
Dambrun, M. (2016). When the dissolution of perceived body boundaries elicits happiness: The effect of selflessness induced by a body scan meditation. Consciousness and Cognition,46, 89–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.09.013CrossRefPubMed
Dambrun, M., Berniard, A., Didelot, T., Chaulet, M., Droit-Volet, S., Corman, M., Juneau, C., & Martinon, L. M. (2019). Unified consciousness and the effect of body scan meditation on happiness: Alteration of inner-body experience and feeling of harmony as central processes. Mindfulness,10(8), 1530–1544.CrossRef
Dambrun, M., & Ricard, M. (2011). Self-centeredness and selflessness: A theory of self-based psychological functioning and its consequences for happiness. Review of General Psychology,15(2), 138–157. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023059CrossRef
De Oliveira, P., Juneau, C., Stinus, C., Corman, M., Michelli, N., Pellerin, N., Shankland, R., & Dambrun, M. (2024). Cultivating self-transcendence through meditation practice: A test of the role of meta-awareness, (dis)identification and non-reactivity. Psychological Reports, 129(1), 595–632. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241246469
Disner, S. G., Beevers, C. G., Haigh, E. A., & Beck, A. T. (2011). Neural mechanisms of the cognitive model of depression. Nature Reviews Neuroscience,12(8), 467–477. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn3027CrossRefPubMed
Docteur, A., Mirabel-Sarron, C., Kaya Lefèvre, H., Sala, L., Husky, M., Swendsen, J., & Gorwood, P. (2020). Role of autobiographical memory in the impact of MBCT on dysfunctional attitudes, depressive symptoms and anxiety in bipolar I patients. Journal of Affective Disorders,276, 907–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.07.072CrossRefPubMed
Dozois, D. J. A., & Beck, A. T. (2008). Cognitive schemas, beliefs and assumptions. In J. R. Z. Abela & B. L. Hankin (Eds.), Handbook of depression in children and adolescents (pp. 119–143). Guilford Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-045078-0.00006-X
Elimari, N. (2023). Approches duelle et évolutive de la neurocognition: nature et corrélats neuraux des processus de régulation entre instincts et cognition de haut-niveau. Doctoral dissertation, Reims.
Elimari, N., & Lafargue, G. (2023a). Neural correlates of performance monitoring vary as a function of competition between automatic and controlled processes: An ERP study. Consciousness and Cognition,110, Article 103505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2023.103505CrossRefPubMed
Elimari, N., & Lafargue, G. (2023b). Qu’est-ce que la psychologie évolutive ? Cognition et comportements à la lumière de l’évolution. L’Annee Psychologique,123(1), 173–214. https://doi.org/10.3917/anpsy1.231.0173CrossRef
Elimari, N., & Lafargue, G. (2024). Two social minds in one brain? Error-related negativity provides evidence for parallel processing pathways during social evaluation. Cognition and Emotion,38(1), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2023.2270200CrossRefPubMed
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods,39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146CrossRefPubMed
García-Campayo, J., Hijar-Aguinaga, R., López-Del-Hoyo, Y., Magallón-Botaya, R., Fernández-Martínez, S., Barceló-Soler, A., Soler-Ribaudi, J., & Montero-Marin, J. (2023). Effectiveness of four deconstructive meditative practices on well-being and self-deconstruction: Study protocol for an exploratory randomized controlled trial. Trials,24(1), Article 125. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07151-0CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin,132(5), 692–731. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692CrossRefPubMed
Goldberg, S. B., Imhoff-Smith, T., Bolt, D. M., Wilson-Mendenhall, C. D., Dahl, C. J., Davidson, R. J., & Rosenkranz, M. A. (2020). Testing the efficacy of a multicomponent, self-guided, smartphone-based meditation app: Three-armed randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mental Health,7(11), Article e23825. https://doi.org/10.2196/23825CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Hasenkamp, W., Wilson-Mendenhall, C. D., Duncan, E., & Barsalou, L. W. (2012). Mind wandering and attention during focused meditation: A fine-grained temporal analysis of fluctuating cognitive states. NeuroImage,59(1), 750–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.07.008CrossRefPubMed
Kaviani, H., Hatami, N., & Javaheri, F. (2012). The impact of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) on mental health and quality of life in a sub-clinically depressed population. Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy,1(14), 21–28.
Klainin-Yobas, P., Cho, M. A. A., & Creedy, D. (2012). Efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions on depressive symptoms among people with mental disorders: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies,49(1), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.08.014CrossRefPubMed
Kumar, A., Behura, A. K., & Kumar, A. (2023). Ego: An epistemological analysis of self-centric consciousness through cultural perspectives and spiritual/theological dimensions in Hinduism and Buddhism. Pharos Journal of Theology, 104(4). https://doi.org/10.46222/pharosjot.104.422
Leufke, R., Zilcha-Mano, S., Feld, A., & Lev-Ari, S. (2013). Effects of “The Work” meditation on psychopathologic symptoms: A pilot study. Alternative and Complementary Therapies,19(3), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1089/act.2013.19303CrossRef
Linardon, J. (2023). Rates of attrition and engagement in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness apps: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy,170, Article 104421.CrossRefPubMed
Lutz, A., Jha, A. P., Dunne, J. D., & Saron, C. D. (2015). Investigating the phenomenological matrix of mindfulness-related practices from a neurocognitive perspective. American Psychologist,70(7), 632–658.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Lv, J., Liu, Q., Zeng, X., Oei, T. P. S., Liu, Y., Xu, K., Sun, W., Hou, H., & Liu, J. (2020). The effect of four Immeasurables meditations on depressive symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review,76, Article 101814.CrossRefPubMed
Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology,24(4), 503–515.CrossRef
Montero-Marin, J., Puebla-Guedea, M., Herrera-Mercadal, P., Cebolla, A., Soler, J., Demarzo, M., Vazquez, C., Rodríguez-Bornaetxea, F., & García-Campayo, J. (2016). Psychological effects of a 1-month meditation retreat on experienced meditators: The role of non-attachment. Frontiers in Psychology,7, Article 1935.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Montoya, A. K. (2024). Conditional process analysis for two-instance repeated-measures designs. Psychological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000715
Navarro, O., Olivos, P., & Fleury-Bahi, G. (2017). Connectedness to Nature Scale”: Validity and reliability in the French context. Frontiers in Psychology,8, Article 2180.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Grandpierre, Z. (2019). Mindfulness in nature enhances connectedness and mood. Ecopsychology,11(2), 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2018.0061CrossRef
Perestelo-Perez, L., Barraca, J., Peñate, W., Rivero-Santana, A., & Alvarez-Perez, Y. (2017). Mindfulness-based interventions for the treatment of depressive rumination: Systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology,17(3), 282–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.07.004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Petriglieri, J. L. (2011). Under threat: Responses to and the consequences of threats to individuals’ identities. Academy of Management Review,36(4), 641–662. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0087CrossRef
Skinner, N., & Brewer, N. (2002). The dynamics of threat and challenge appraisals prior to stressful achievement events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,83(3), 678–692. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.3.678CrossRefPubMed
Stinus, C., & Berjot, S. (2024). Threat to the self at the heart of depression: Mediating role and depressogenic prism hypothesis: Amenaza del yo en el núcleo de la depresión: Papel mediador e hipótesis del prisma depresógeno. Revista de Psicopatología y Psicología Clínica,29(3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.5944/rppc.41391CrossRef
Stinus, C., & Berjot, S. (2026). Selflessness as a potential buffer against depression: Investigating its impact on depressogenic schemas and identity threat. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000456
Stinus, C., Elimari, N., & Berjot, S. (2024). Reconnecting with our human nature: A holistic approach to addressing social and environmental crises. European Consumer Law Journal,3, 485–500.
Stinus, C., Robion, M., Shankland, R., & Berjot, S. (2025). Connectedness to humanity and nature: Common source but distinct mental health and mindfulness outcomes – validation of the Connectedness to Humanity Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment,47(2), Article 36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-025-10211-1CrossRef
Swami, R. (2016). The journey within: Exploring the path of bhakti, a contemporary guide to yoga’s ancient wisdom. Mandala Publishing.
Soma Thera. (1962). The contribution of Buddhism to world culture. Buddhist Publication Society.
van der Velden, A. M., Kuyken, W., Wattar, U., Crane, C., Pallesen, K. J., Dahlgaard, J., Fjorback, L. O., & Piet, J. (2015). A systematic review of mechanisms of change in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy in the treatment of recurrent major depressive disorder. Clinical Psychology Review,37, 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.02.001CrossRefPubMed
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (2017). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience (Rev. ed.). MIT Press.
Weissman, A. N., & Beck, A. T. (1978). Development and validation of the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale: A preliminary investigation. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
