Introduction
Around 10–20% of adolescents in the West suffer from symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression (Polanczyk et al.
2015; WHO
2014), which may hinder academic achievement (Cortiella and Horowitz
2014). However, individual factors, such as academic buoyancy, which refers to a student’s capacity to overcome everyday academic life setbacks and challenges successfully (Martin and Marsh
2009), may protect from the effects of psychological distress in the school context. New easily applicable methods are called upon to prevent and mitigate adolescents’ psychological distress and to support academic buoyancy, thereby potentially promoting adolescents’ subsequent mental health and successful educational careers. In addition, intervention methods should work equally well for adolescents with poor academic skills and those with normally developing skills.
There are a plethora of studies of adult populations showing that brief modern therapeutic methods and programs based on acceptance and commitment therapy are effective in the treatment of a variety of psychological conditions, including stress, depression, and anxiety (Flaxman et al.
2013; Hayes et al.
2012; Powers et al.
2009; Ruiz
2012). Moreover, a growing number of studies has used the acceptance and commitment approach in the treatment of adolescents, that is, 11–16-year-olds, for example, to alleviate depression (e.g., Petts et al.
2017), to alter behavioral outcomes (e.g., Armstrong et al.
2013), and to relieve physical conditions, such as pain (e.g., Wicksell et al.
2009). In general, acceptance and commitment approach based interventions for adolescents have shown positive effects in alleviating psychological symptoms, increasing quality of life, and enhancing psychological flexibility (Swain et al.
2015). However, studies in school settings are rare. Most of the previous studies have focused on clinical samples, that is, on participants who have significantly elevated psychological or physical symptoms or diagnosable disorders. In addition, in previous studies, the study designs and intervention programs have often been either poorly specified or included only some elements of the acceptance and commitment therapy protocol (Swain et al.
2015). Thus, due to previous research limitations, more information is needed on the usability of acceptance and commitment based interventions among adolescents in alleviating stress and promoting coping with academic setbacks in school settings.
Over the last few years, new web- and mobile-based acceptance and commitment interventions have emerged and have been used successfully among adult participants (e.g., Lappalainen et al.,
2014a; Lappalainen et al.
2014b; Lappalainen et al.
2015; Puolakanaho et al.
2018) and university students (Räsänen et al.
2016). It is likely that mobile-based interventions are also suitable for adolescents who are familiar with using modern technology in their everyday lives. However, no previous studies exist in which web- or mobile-based acceptance and commitment programs have been used with adolescents to enhance their stress coping. In contrast, interventions have hitherto been carried out in face-to-face meetings either individually or in groups. Consequently, the aim of this study was to examine whether the novel web- and mobile-based acceptance and commitment program influenced stress symptoms and academic buoyancy in the school setting in a general (non-clinical) sample of ninth-grade adolescents. In addition, the study examined whether the efficacy of the acceptance and commitment intervention differs based on whether an adolescent has poor academic skills.
Applying the Acceptance and Commitment Model to Adolescents
Acceptance and commitment therapy is described as a third-wave cognitive therapy developed by Hayes et al. (
1999), and it focuses on recognizing participants’ own thoughts and emotions, as well as their connections to concrete behavior. More specifically, acceptance and commitment intervention models combine mindfulness and acceptance with behavioral principles and an understanding of personal values.
Mindfulness refers to a state of consciousness in which attention is focused on present-moment phenomena, and
acceptance refers to a willingness to experience all mental events (e.g., thoughts, emotions, and sensations) without changing, avoiding, or controlling them.
Behavioral principles are used to clarify one’s personal values and to take actions that lead to goal accomplishment (Hayes et al.
2006; Hofmann and Asmundson
2008; Williams et al.
2008).
Recent acceptance and commitment intervention models have aimed to reinforce the six core psychological processes: the ability to remain flexibly and purposefully in the present moment and to be mindful of thoughts, feelings, bodily sensations, and action potentials; keeping a perspective-taking attitude on thinking and feeling; clarifying one’s hopes, values, and goals in life; doing and cultivating things in line with identified hopes, values, and goals; willingly accepting unwanted feelings by taking actions that are consistent with one’s hopes, values, and goals; and increasing defusion skills, i.e., observing and recognizing one’s thoughts that interfere with experienced life events and valued actions and seeing them as thoughts rather than literal truths (Flaxman et al.
2013; Hayes et al.
2012). Each of these processes is a psychological skill that can be enhanced in any life domain with regard to unwanted internal experiences or symptoms (e.g., thoughts, feelings, and physical sensations). Therefore, acceptance and commitment interventions are thought to be a trans-diagnostic psychological treatments that potentially influences multiple psychologically derived symptoms and life issues (Dindo et al.
2017; Hayes and Hofman
2017). These theoretical views also suggest that acceptance and commitment interventions may also work as preventive and early tools in alleviating diverse psychological symptoms (here, stress) and promoting well-being and health (here, academic buoyancy). The above-mentioned acceptance and commitment approach principles can also be used for planning interventions for adolescents. However, many factors ought to be considered when devising programs for adolescents (Ciarrochi et al.
2012; Halliburton and Cooper
2015; Hayes and Ciarrochi
2015; see also Steinberg
2002).
Adolescent Stress and Acceptance and Commitment Interventions
Adolescents face multiple social, psychological, and physiological changes simultaneously in different life domains because of biological maturation, cognitive development, evolving sexuality, school transitions, and changes in social relationships, (e.g., Denham et al.
2009). In adolescence, conflicts with parents tend to increase and closeness with parents decreases as adolescents spend more time with their peers and come to value friendships more highly. Adolescents also face the challenges of learning to live independently and building their own social network by exploring and building their identities and starting romantic relationships (Steinberg and Morris
2001). At the same time, many adolescents experience stress in relation to school (e.g., Salmela-Aro et al.
2009; Seiffge-Krenke et al.
2012). Ninth-grade adolescents, who formed the target group of this study and who are finalizing their compulsory education, also face new personal and academic challenges because, for example, they have to complete a great deal of school projects and have to clarify their interests to be able to choose their future educational path. All these issues may elicit stress and may even lead to burnout (Salmela-Aro
2017) and other mental health-related problems, such as substance abuse and self-harm behaviors, anxiety, and depression (Avison
2010; Dyson and Renk
2006). It is also well known that stress experiences at younger ages are related to various psychological symptoms and clinical disorders in adulthood (Lee et al.
2014; Liu and Alloy
2010; Mundy et al. 2015). Thus, there is a need for effective strategies to protect youth from the dysfunctional effects of stress.
In an American survey, over 30% of teens reported being overwhelmed and depressed or sad due to stress (APA
2014). In a Swedish survey, 37% of girls and 22% of boys reported that they were frequently stressed (Wiklund et al.
2012). Similar trends have also been reported in a Finnish national school health survey (Finnish School Health Survey
2017), in which 32% of girls and 19% of boys reported serious schoolwork-related tiredness during the two last years of high school. Interestingly, the results of all these studies propose that girls are more likely than boys to experience stress (see also Wilhsson et al.
2016). These alarming figures call for novel and easily applicable methods to prevent and mitigate adolescents’ stress and to support their coping skills.
Some previous studies demonstrate that acceptance and commitment interventions can be effective in alleviating adolescents’ stress. For instance, Burckhardt et al. (
2016) conducted an intervention study that included elements from acceptance and commitment therapy and positive psychology in a sample of high school students (
n= 267, aged 16–17 years) in Australia. In their study, significant changes with medium-to-strong effect sizes were observed in the stress scores of students who commenced the program with high stress, depression, and anxiety scores. Livheim et al. (
2015) conducted a pilot study in school settings of adolescents who were screened for psychological problems in Australia (
n= 66) and Sweden (
n= 32). In their study, significant improvements in large effect sizes were reported for stress. In his earlier study, Livheim (
2004) conducted an acceptance and commitment program for youth (
n= 230, aged 16–19 years), which revealed significant changes in stress and psychological flexibility that were also visible after two years. It is notable that the above-mentioned studies involved participants from clinical samples, that is, all the participants had elevated levels of psychological symptoms. Moreover, the interventions were implemented in face-to-face group settings and were led by trained counsellors. In contrast, no acceptance and commitment intervention results were found in a recent large-scale study conducted in school settings by teachers (Van der Gucht et al.
2017). Thus, although there is some evidence of the usefulness of acceptance and commitment interventions for adolescents, no previous study has used web or mobile technology to deliver the program individually to participants, which is the key topic of the current article.
Adaptive Coping and Acceptance and Commitment Interventions
There are wide individual differences among adolescents in their experiences of stress, as well as in how they respond to or cope with stress (APA
2014). Building capacity for academic buoyancy can help them cope with challenges in academic life. Academic buoyancy refers to a positive and optimistic attitude toward everyday academic setbacks and an ability to deal with such setbacks in the course of ordinary life (e.g., poor performance, competing deadlines, performance pressure, difficult tasks; Martin and Marsh
2009). Academic buoyancy has been shown to be negatively associated with psychological risks, such as school or text anxiety, and with a lack of self-efficacy (Martin and Marsh
2008,
2009).
Some theoretical frameworks have combined stress management and the promotion of coping skills (e.g., Haase
2004), and these frameworks have been further tested in adolescent interventions, usually among clinical samples (e.g., Rosenberg et al.
2015). However, due to the trans-diagnostic nature of acceptance and commitment interventions and their proposed influence on deep psychological functions (e.g., Dindo et al.
2017; Hayes and Hofmann
2017), acceptance and commitment based exercises can be assumed to enhance adolescents’ self-awareness and independence. These can be further expected to increase their coping skills, such as academic buoyancy in the current study, against stressors, as well as to alleviate experiences of stress. A recent study (Hirvonen et al.
2018) found that high levels of academic buoyancy were associated with a lower level of stress later in school. As such, buoyancy can be assumed a kind of counterforce against stress, although it has not been studied in the acceptance and commitment therapy context among adolescents.
Poor Academic Skills and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
Poor academic performance may expose students to increased stress and psychological symptoms in comparison with better-performing students. A history of difficulties in learning and academic skills can lead, for example, to experiences of struggle, more conflicts with teachers and parents concerning homework, and increased negative emotions, such as frustration and disappointment in everyday learning situations (Cortiella and Horowitz
2014; Polanczyk et al.
2015). Consequently, it is possible that students with poor academic skills are particularly at risk for developing stress-related symptoms and could thus benefit from stress-reducing interventions. Yet, while some studies have noted that acceptance and commitment interventions may reduce psychological symptoms among students with academic challenges, there is little knowledge about whether acceptance and commitment interventions are similarly effective for students with different academic skill levels. Beauchemin et al. (
2008) were able to improve the social and academic skills of adolescents with learning disabilities (n = 34) through five weeks of mindfulness exercises carried out by their teacher. Tentatively positive effects have also been shown in samples involving learning disabilities and anxiety (Brown and Hooper.
2009). Interestingly, no study has examined whether students’ academic skills moderate the efficacy of acceptance and commitment intervention in reducing stress and promoting academic buoyancy. This was one of the aims of the present study.
Mobile and Web-based Interventions
A substantial amount of psychological interventions utilizing new digital technology has been developed over the past few decades. Their usage is not restricted to place and time and they are usually cost effective. In addition, they can be used without a specific therapeutic background, and they can provide new insights for different professionals, such as teachers. According to Andersson and Titov (
2014), digital interventions are considered as efficient as face-to-face therapies, especially when they include certain features, such as motivation aspects and personal therapeutic support (see also Wozney et al.
2017).
Over the last few years, new web-based acceptance and commitment intervention programs have been developed among adults, which have been shown to be efficient in alleviating depression (Lappalainen et al.
2014a; Lappalainen et al.
2015) and work-related stress (Kinnunen et al.
2018) and in enhancing well-being (Lappalainen et al.
2014b). In a recent randomized controlled study, Räsänen et al. (
2016) investigated the effects of a web-based acceptance and commitment program in a sample of university students (n = 68; ages 19–32 years) with varying levels of psychological distress. They found medium-to-large effect sizes in several well-being measures. However, there is no study of adolescents (aged 12–16 years) in which an acceptance and commitment intervention based program has been used and delivered utilizing web and mobile technology.
The Current Study
The theoretical views presented above suggest that acceptance and commitment interventions may also work as preventive and early tools in alleviating diverse psychological symptoms (here, stress) and promoting well-being and health (here, academic buoyancy). In the current study, using the knowledge gained from new, complete acceptance and commitment intervention models for youth (e.g., Ciarrochi et al.
2012; Hayes and Chiarrochi
2015), a novel five-week web- and mobile-delivered intervention program called Youth COMPASS was developed. The main goal of the study was to explore the effects of the Youth COMPASS program on overall stress, school stress, and academic buoyancy among ninth-grade adolescents, who were in their last year of comprehensive school at the time of the study and therefore also vulnerable to stress-related experiences. The total sample of 249 adolescents was randomized into two acceptance and commitment intervention groups and a control group receiving only the usual support from the school. Half of the participants were identified as having poor academic skills.
The current randomized controlled trial study addressed three main research questions. First, to what extent can ninth-grade adolescents’ overall and school-related stress be reduced and academic buoyancy enhanced through the five-week web- and mobile-based acceptance and commitment intervention known as Youth COMPASS? Second, do the outcomes in the two intervention groups (which differed from each other slightly in the amount of personal face-to-face support) differ from each other regarding their efficacy, and do they differ from the control group’s outcomes? Third, do the adolescents’ poor academic skills moderate the efficacy of Youth COMPASS in reducing adolescents’ stress and enhancing their academic buoyancy? Based on the acceptance and commitment view, the intervention was thought to enhance underlying psychological processes and, through them, different well-being experiences. Consequently, it was expected that the level of stress will decrease and academic buoyancy will increase more in the two intervention groups than in the control group. Because there are no previous studies on the influences of poor academic skills on acceptance and commitment intervention outcomes among youth, no hypotheses were proposed for the last question.
Discussion
Recent studies have shown that over 30% of adolescents in the West suffer from stress and related symptoms, which may have long-lasting effects on their subsequent health development and educational careers. On the other hand, individual factors, such as academic buoyancy, are proposed to protect youth from the effects of stress. The interesting question is whether modern brief therapeutic methods, such as the acceptance and commitment intervention model, could be modified and used to alleviate stress and to promote academic buoyancy in the school context. In the current randomized trial study, this issue was explored in a school setting using a general (non-clinical) sample of 249 adolescents, who were randomized into two intervention groups and a control group. The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of a novel five-week web-based acceptance and commitment intervention program called Youth COMPASS in reducing adolescents’ stress and promoting their academic buoyancy.
All participants in the Youth COMPASS intervention performed short online tasks following the principles of acceptance and commitment approach and had weekly contact with a personal coach. Half of the adolescents in the Youth COMPASS intervention group also had two one-hour face-to-face meetings with their personal coach. The study also explored whether the two intervention groups differed from each other and whether the gains in the intervention groups were larger than in the control group. In addition, the study explored whether the adolescents’ poor academic skills influenced the intervention results. The results indicated that the two intervention groups did not differ from each other in terms of gains during the intervention, and in the following analyses, they were combined. When the total number of participants (n= 243; intention-to-treat analyses) were included in the analyses, no differences between the two intervention groups and the control group were found. However, when those participants who had fulfilled an acceptable number of tasks (at least three of the five intervention modules; n= 205; per-protocol analyses) were explored, statistically significant changes that were in line with the expectations were observed in overall stress and academic buoyancy in favor of the intervention groups. Additional analyses also showed that those who had higher stress in the initial stage of the study had greater positive gains in interventions than those who had low initial stress levels. Poor academic skills were found to have no effect on the intervention results.
The main aim of the current study was to explore the acceptance and commitment intervention effects on overall and school stress. In line with the expectations, during the 5-week intervention period, a small but significant decrease was observed in the level of overall stress in the intervention group but not in the control group. A similar trend regarding a group-level change was found in school stress, though it was marginally statistically significant. Burckhardt et al. (
2016) conducted an acceptance and commitment approach and positive psychology-based intervention in an Australian school setting and showed a somewhat greater change in stress (as well as in depression and anxiety). However, their results varied considerably based on the grade level of the participants. Further, in the last grade of high school (a grade level comparable with that of the current sample), the effect sizes were even smaller than in the current study. Livheim et al. (
2015) conducted a six-week acceptance and commitment based group session intervention aimed at decreasing stress among a small group of Swedish youth. In their study, the participants showed an impressive reduction in stress (
d= 1.20 using the Perceived Stress Scale), which is in line with Livheim’s (
2004) earlier intervention study. Thus, the results of the current novel intervention are in line with earlier studies using normal school samples, but they fall behind the gains in studies using clinical samples.
This article also explored whether the intervention influenced the adolescents’ academic buoyancy. This is likely the first acceptance and commitment intervention study in which academic buoyancy has been measured among adolescents. Buoyancy refers to one’s capacity to overcome everyday academic life setbacks and challenges successfully (Martin and Marsh
2009), and it can be assumed to be a kind of counterforce against stress. In line with the expectations, the current study showed a small but significant increase in academic buoyancy in favor of the two intervention groups. The magnitude of the results is comparable, though contrary, to the changes in overall stress in the current study. The current findings support the theoretical views of acceptance and commitment and its assumed ability to influence multiple core psychological skills (Dindo et al.
2017) and, via them, coping skills, such as academic buoyancy. In other words, the results of the current study propose that intervention increases self-awareness, acceptance, and defusion skills in relation to challenging situations in academic life. It likely also promotes the ability to set personal goals, as well as the courage to take independent actions in one’s life. These, in turn, will enhance academic buoyancy.
The results of the current study are in line with the promising results of some previous face-to-face interventions (e.g., Burckhardt et al.
2016; Livheim et al.
2015), as well as theoretical views on interventions involving adolescents (Ciarrochi et al.
2012; Hayes and Chiarrochi
2015). They also corroborate findings concerning the possibilities of web and phone technology possibilities in interventions (Andersson and Titov
2014; Wozney et al.
2017) and recent empirical explorations of these possibilities among adult participants (e.g., Kinnunen et al.
2018; Lappalainen et al.
2014a; Lappalainen et al.
2015; Puolakanaho et al.
2018; Räsänen et al.
2016). The results of the current article concerning overall stress and academic buoyancy also support the view and results of earlier studies showing that acceptance and commitment programs may have an effect on deep psychological skills and may, therefore, influence different psychological well-being and health-related factors (Dindo et al.
2017; Hayes and Hofmann
2017).
The current article also explored whether poor academic skills moderated the effects of the intervention. The results indicate that poor academic skills had no effect on the efficacy of the intervention, suggesting that the intervention was equally effective for students with poor academic skills as it was for those with normally developed skills, which is a novel finding in the field of acceptance and commitment approach. In addition, neither adherence nor commitment to the intervention depended on the students’ academic skills. In the current intervention program, possible problems resulting from poor academic skills were considered during the planning of the program; therefore, most of the exercises were available in both text and audiovisual formats. The finding suggests that regardless of the level of academic performance, every student can benefit from the program. Given the exceptionally high prevalence of poor academic skills among the student population (Cortiella and Horowitz
2014), this finding is important, as it suggests that the usability and efficacy of this kind of intervention does not depend on the level of academic skills. The finding is also in accordance with theoretical views on acceptance and commitment therapy approach and the supposed change mechanism (e.g., Hayes et al.
2012), which proposes that academic skills are not connected to changes in core acceptance and commitment processes.
Notably, in the current research, the majority of the participants did not have clinically and personally significant symptoms, such as stress or anxiety, nor did they undergo corresponding treatment; therefore, there was no personally driven motivation to participate in the intervention program, as in most prior acceptance and commitment studies. It is noteworthy that earlier studies have indicated that effects from interventions among general samples are usually smaller than among clinical samples (Swain et al.
2015). It is notable that the gains in the current intervention were nevertheless greater among those who had a higher level of overall or school stress than those who had a lower level of stress in the initial phase of the study. In this light, the small intervention-related changes found in the current study seem more promising. There may also be other explanations for the results; for example, the measures (scales), despite showing good internal consistency, may not be sufficiently sensitive to tap changes.
Although the participants’ commitment and motivation toward the program were supported in several ways—for example, via weekly contact with the coach, the structured content of the intervention program, and, in many cases, the game-like exercises designed specifically to appeal to adolescents—it must be borne in mind that adherence to the intervention was not optimally shown for all adolescents. In total, 25% of the adolescents did not meet the adherence criteria, with a relatively higher number of male versus female participants lacking adherence to the program. One reason for the lower adherence among some adolescents is that the participants were expected to do the exercises in their own leisure time, as the program was not part of the regular school curriculum. However, it is still notable that the majority, that is, 75% of the adolescents, did finish the program. Considering this and the fact that the intervention demonstrated clear positive effects, the results of the current study are promising.
The current study introduced a new mobile- and web-delivered acceptance and commitment program called Youth COMPASS, which was used with the aid of close or distant personal contact with a coach. The findings suggest that support that is more distant worked as well as the model with closer personal contact. This is in line with the recent results of Lappalainen et al. (
2014a,
2014b), which suggest that web-delivered acceptance and commitment interventions without personal meetings may work better than the same intervention involving personal meetings with a coach. These findings may imply that technology-based interventions may include additional elements that further support the development of independency and self-knowledge skills (such as awareness, acceptance, defusion skills, and valued actions) related to acceptance and commitment therapy. In other words, the results suggest that technology-based features could further promote the targeted goals of acceptance and commitment intervention.
Limitations and Future Directions
In the present study, no differences were found in the intervention outcomes between the two intervention models, the web- and mobile-delivered acceptance and commitment intervention model, which included an extra hour of personal contact at the beginning and end of the study, and the model without personal face-to-face contact. The results are promising, as they suggest that the web-based intervention was equally effective with or without extra face-to-face contact in a general (non-clinical) sample. However, in future research, it would be interesting to explore the influence of a larger variation in face-to-face contact on the intervention results, together with varying levels of initial symptoms. The current study can be considered a pilot study exploring the possibilities of a mobile-delivered brief acceptance and commitment intervention for preventive purposes among youth. In future studies and in the implementation of the interventions into clinical or school practice, it is important to involve parents, teachers and other important figures in adolescents’ lives in the intervention in the early phases of its planning.
When attempting to generalize the findings, it is worth noting that the participants were not selected from a clinical sample but rather randomly selected from a general student population, with an emphasis on poor academic skills. In other words, the gains in the current article are based on average changes in a group of a general (non-clinical) sample of adolescents. When considering the clinical meaningfulness of the findings, one must consider the sensitivity of the measures, the severity of the symptoms (i.e., the amount of stress and academic buoyancy), and their prevalence in the explored sample. This issue can be estimated using statistical tools if the effect size and prevalence of disorders in a specific sample are known (see the illustrative presentation by Coe
2002; see also Griner et al.
1981). Following this, the effect sizes found in the present study (although being in line with those in general samples; see Swain et al.
2015) were weaker than typically observed among clinical samples, with specific difficulties in stress management and academic buoyancy (e.g. Livheim et al.
2015; Livheim
2004). Yet, the found effect sizes were also good in light of the statistical view presented above (i.e. Coe
2002 and Griner et al.
1981). However, in the future, clinical study samples should also be used to obtain insights into the clinical significance of the effects of the program.
Another limitation relates to the lower adherence rates among male participants compared to those among females. An analysis of the non-completers (25% of adolescents randomized to the intervention groups) showed that they were mostly male, and they reported having lower levels of initial stress and higher buoyancy than those who completed the program (see also APA
2014; Wiklund et al.
2012). However, in some earlier studies, boys have also been observed to use avoidance and distraction methods as a means for coping with stress (APA
2014; see also the Teen Help website). Thus, the high number of male participants who did not experience stress or commit to the program may reveal an avoidance and distraction strategy rather than actual stress levels and interest in the program. Nevertheless, it seems that male participants do not as easily commit to this kind of intervention as females. Motivation strategies, especially by male participants, ought to be carefully considered in future intervention studies. The focus of the current study was on 15- to 16-year-old ninth-grade adolescents who were attending their last year of lower secondary school. In future studies, it would be important to explore whether this kind of brief intervention is also useful among younger and older samples of youth, as well as in other educational and cultural contexts.
A final limitation is that only stress, school-related stress, and academic buoyancy were examined as outcomes of the intervention. Because acceptance and commitment practices are thought to have broad effects on well-being (e.g., Hayes et al.
2012), the reported measures give a slightly narrow view of the possible effects of the Youth COMPASS intervention. It is also notable that the two used measures of stress may tap different aspects of it and thereby influence the results. The overall stress measure is likely to assess more strongly the degree of current stress symptoms, whereas the school stress scale is likely to assess the long-term experiences of school-related stress (i.e., the extent to which school-related demands exceed students’ resources) that resemble students’ experienced level of school-related exhaustion (Salmela-Aro et al.
2009). These differences might have partly affected the measures’ sensitivity to detect short-term changes in the stress experiences (cf. relatively stronger intervention effects were observed overall stress than in relation to school-related stress). In addition, the role of the coach–participant interaction in motivation or the impact of the number and different types of intervention exercises on the outcomes could not be explored in the current article, but these will be important to clarify in future studies. More studies are needed to confirm the findings of the current study.
Practical Implications
The findings of the current study are promising and propose that this kind of intervention could be used as a preventive and early tool for alleviating stress and promoting coping skills among adolescents. The study also suggests that it would be useful to investigate further the potential of web-based acceptance and commitment interventions among adolescents. This study opens possibilities to expand the repertoire of currently available school-based programs. It would be interesting to fit the program into regular school curriculum practices and to apply it to all pupils in a class. Web and mobile technology makes this kind of intervention feasible, easy to implement, and cost effective, and it may reduce the risk of stigma by normalizing interventions provided for mental health (Ciarrochi et al.
2012; Hayes and Ciarrochi
2015). In addition, the program could generate new ideas and understanding for teachers and other professionals in their work with adolescents.
An intervention study that applies Youth COMPASS to a clinical sample would be interesting given the findings of the current study. It is likely that the program would work even better with adolescents who experience psychological distress and who may be more highly motivated to participate in and take advantage of the program. However, when using clinical samples, it would be important to provide participants with the possibility of personal contact with a healthcare professional. In addition, small weekly group meetings could provide different therapeutic elements, such as peer support for same-age adolescents with similar experiences (Livheim
2004; Livheim et al.
2015). This could further help adolescents become more aware and accepting of their inner experiences and to achieve their personal life goals and interests, thereby promoting the targets of acceptance and commitment therapy (Ciarrochi et al.
2012; Hayes and Chiarrochi
2015).
Modern technology can also increase the possibilities of applying programs to diverse settings, such as schools and in a variety of leisure activities. These kinds of interventions do not necessarily demand specialized skills, and they can be used by different kinds of professionals working with adolescents. In addition, the programs can also increase adults’ understanding of psychological skills that are important not only for adolescents, but also for all human beings. However, it is also important to observe that the theoretical views that are mostly “hidden” in the program can be misunderstood, which may lead to misuse and a devaluing of the program if users do not have proper knowledge of the theoretical background behind the program. In addition, modifications are needed for future study designs and protocols.