Comparing Random Allocation and Allocation by Preference to Mindfulness Practice

A Randomized Controlled Study Comparing the Effect of Preferential and Random Allocation to Type of Mindfulness Practice in the General Population.

The goal of this randomized controlled study is to examine whether allocation based on preference to one of two brief mindfulness meditation practices (mindfulness of the breath or mindfulness of sounds) influences the potentially beneficial effects of these practices, and influences participants' intention to engage in further mindfulness practice. To the end, members of the general public will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) a group in which they choose which of the two mindfulness practices they do; (2) a group in which they are randomly allocated to do one of the mindfulness practices; and (3) a control group that listens to an audiobook extract. The level of mindfulness of each group will be compared, along with some other outcomes.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Healthy
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: Mindfulness of the breath; Behavioral: Mindfulness of sounds; Behavioral: Audiobook control

Detailed Description

The study will be an online administered experimental 3x2x3 design, with between-participant factor group (allocated to mindfulness practice based on preference vs. randomly allocated to mindfulness practice vs. audiobook control); a between-participant factor of practice type (mindfulness of the breath vs. mindfulness of sounds), which will be a dummy variable for the control group; and a within-participant factor of time (baseline vs. post-allocation vs. post-intervention). Participants in the 'preference group' will choose which of two mindfulness meditation practices (mindfulness of the breath or mindfulness of sounds) to undertake based on a brief description. Participants in the 'random allocation' group will be allocated to one of the two mindfulness practices at random, and participants in the control group will listen to an excerpt from an audiobook of an equivalent length of time. The primary outcome, state mindfulness, will be measured at all three time-points, as will positive and negative mood. Practice quality and intentional to engage in future mindfulness practice will be measured at post-intervention only.

The following hypotheses will be tested:

H1: Both the allocation by preference and random allocation groups will show greater improvement than the control group on both the primary outcome (baseline to post-intervention change in state mindfulness) and all the secondary outcomes, with the exception of practice quality (which is not applicable for the control group).

H2: The allocation by preference group will show better primary and secondary outcomes than the allocation by random group.

H3: The difference between each mindfulness-practice group and the control group in baseline to post-intervention improvement in mood state will be statistically mediated by baseline to post-intervention increase in state mindfulness.

H4:The difference between the allocation by preference and random allocation groups in baseline to post-intervention change in mood state will be serially, statistically mediated by practice quality and baseline to post-intervention change in state mindfulness respectively, such that participants allocated to the preference group will show higher practice quality, which in turn will statistically predict greater improvement in mindfulness, which in turn will statistically predict greater improvement in mood state.

H5: The same statistical mediation effects as described in H4 above will be observed when the outcome is self-reported intention to practice mindfulness in future, instead of mood state.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 241
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United Kingdom
  • Kent
    • Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent, United Kingdom, TN1 2YG
      • Salomons Institute for Applied Psychology, Canterbury Christ Church University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

-Resident in the UK

Exclusion Criteria:

• Currently practicing mindfulness meditation more than once per week.
• Experiencing significant mental health problems.
• Believe that practicing mindfulness could cause significant distress.
• Previously practicing mindfulness has caused significant distress.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Basic Science
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Factorial Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

3

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Allocation by preference; Participants are allocated to the one of the two mindfulness practices that they would prefer to do, based on a short description.	Behavioral: Mindfulness of the breath; A 10 minute, audio guided, mindfulness of the breath meditation of the sort used in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy; Behavioral: Mindfulness of sounds; A 10 minute, audio guided, mindfulness of sounds meditation of the sort used in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy
Experimental: Allocation by random; Participants are randomly allocated to one of the two mindfulness practices.	Behavioral: Mindfulness of the breath; A 10 minute, audio guided, mindfulness of the breath meditation of the sort used in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy; Behavioral: Mindfulness of sounds; A 10 minute, audio guided, mindfulness of sounds meditation of the sort used in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy
Active Comparator: Control; Participants listen to an excerpt from an audiobook for an equivalent length of time to the mindfulness practices.	Behavioral: Audiobook control; Listening to a 10 minute extract from an audiobook

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change from baseline (T0) to post-intervention (T2) on the Toronto Mindfulness Scale, State Version (TMS-SV; Lau et al., 2006).	The TMS-SV measures two facets of state mindfulness, namely curiosity (on a 0 to 24 scale) and decentering (on a 0 to 28 scale), with higher scores indicating greater state mindfulness.	Post-intervention (T2; estimated to be on average 20 minutes after baseline)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Change from baseline (T0) to post-allocation (T1) on the Toronto Mindfulness Scale, State Version (TMS-SV; Lau et al., 2006).	As above	Post-allocation (T1; estimated to be on average 5 minutes after baseline)
Practice Quality-Mindfulness (PQ-M; Del Re et al., 2022) at post-intervention (T2), for the mindfulness practice groups only.	The PQ-M produces two scores (perseverance and receptivity), each ranging from 0 to 100, that measure two aspects of mindfulness practice quality. Higher scores indicate greater quality of mindfulness practice.	Post-intervention (T2; estimated to be on average 20 minutes after baseline)
Intention to practice mindfulness in future.	Participants will be asked a bespoke question to measure how strong their intention is to practice mindfulness in future, on a scale of 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater intention to practice.	Post-intervention (T2; estimated to be on average 20 minutes after baseline)
Change from baseline (T0) to post-allocation (T1) on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule - Postive Affect subscale (PANAS-P; Watson et al., 1988)	The PANAS-P measures state positive affect on a 1 to 50 scale, with higher scores indicating greater positive affect.	Post-allocation (T1; estimated to be on average 5 minutes after baseline)
Change from baseline (T0) to post-intervention (T2) on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule - Postive Affect subscale (PANAS-P; Watson et al., 1988)	As above	Post-intervention (T2; estimated to be on average 20 minutes after baseline)
Change from baseline (T0) to post-allocation (T1) on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule - Negative Affect subscale (PANAS-N; Watson et al., 1988)	The PANAS-N measures state negative affect on a 1 to 50 scale, with higher scores indicating greater negative affect.	Post-allocation (T1; estimated to be on average 5 minutes after baseline)
Change from baseline (T0) to post-intervention (T2) on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule - Negative Affect subscale (PANAS-N; Watson et al., 1988)	As above	Post-allocation (T2; estimated to be on average 20 minutes after baseline)

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Canterbury Christ Church University
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Bobbie Scott, MSc, Canterbury Christ Church University; Study Chair: Fergal Jones, PhD, Canterbury Christ Church University; Study Director: Sarah Strohmaier, PhD, Victoria University, Melbourne

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): October 19, 2025
• Primary Completion (Actual): October 20, 2025
• Study Completion (Actual): October 20, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: April 29, 2024
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: May 3, 2024
• First Posted (Actual): May 7, 2024

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): March 20, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 18, 2026
• Last Verified: November 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Other Study ID Numbers: DClinPsychol2022BobbieScott/1

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Once the study findings have been published, anonymised IPD will be made available to other researchers upon request and/or published via a university repository.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: Post-publication for 10 years.
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: Data will be made available to researchers or others with legitimate interest (e.g. clinicians and mindfulness teachers).

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No