Data for: "Restoration skills training (ReST) in a natural setting compared to conventional mindfulness training: Sustained advantages at a 6-month follow-up"

This project integrates restorative environments research and mindfulness research: two disparate but related approaches to managing the demands of modern living. Both offer ways to improve attention regulation by detaching from routine mental contents and engaging with present experience. However, restoration works bottom-up, from supportive environmental features, while mindfulness meditation works top-down, through effortful training. Complementarities between the two are the foundations of restoration skills training (ReST), a five-week mindfulness-based course that uses mindful sensory exploration in a natural setting to build a meditative state effortlessly. As in conventional mindfulness training (CMT), ReST involves a learning structure to teach versatile adaptive skills. Data were collected in four rounds, with successively refined versions of ReST given in a botanic garden and formally matched CMT given indoors. Data were collected to test short-term outcomes of practice sessions and long-term course outcomes. These data form the basis of the analyses presented in (Lymeus et al. (2022) Mindfulness-based restoration skills training (ReST) in a natural setting compared to conventional mindfulness training: Sustained advantages at a 6-month follow-up. Frontiers in Psychology). Note that some variables (marked T1 and T2) are also available in a related dataset (https://doi.org/10.5878/p34t-9j15) and were used in (Lymeus et al. (2020) Mindfulness-based restoration skills training (ReST) in a natural setting compared to conventional mindfulness training: Psychological functioning after a five-week course. Frontiers in Psychology) and were reused by Lymeus et al. in 2022 as background for the follow-up analyses. Data were collected before, immediately after, and six months after two different five-week mindfulness training courses: restoration skills training (ReST) and conventional mindfulness training, between which participants were randomly assigned. The participants were university students who experienced stress or concentration problems. The procedure was repeated in four rounds of data collection during which the ReST course was progressively refined. The data set includes only participants who completed any of the courses during data collection rounds 2-4 (N = 97). The dataset includes original data containing some missing values and 30 datasets with multiple imputations containing complete data. Data were collected with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ; Baer et al. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27-45.), Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (Broadbent et al. (1982). The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 21(1), 1-16.) and the Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen et al. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385-396).本项目整合了恢复性环境研究与正念研究两大领域——二者虽分属不同研究方向却紧密关联，均旨在应对现代生活带来的各类需求与压力。二者均通过脱离常规思维内容、锚定当下体验的路径，助力提升注意力调控能力。但二者的作用模式存在显著差异：恢复性干预依托支持性环境特征，采取自下而上的作用方式；而正念冥想则通过刻意练习，采用自上而下的训练路径。二者的互补性正是恢复性技能训练（Restorative Skills Training, ReST）的核心基础——这是一项为期五周的正念课程，通过在自然环境中开展正念感官探索，帮助练习者无需刻意付出努力即可进入冥想状态。与传统正念训练（Conventional Mindfulness Training, CMT）一致，ReST同样设置了标准化学习框架，用于传授灵活适配的适应性技能。本次研究共开展四轮数据采集，在植物园中依次迭代优化ReST课程版本，并在室内开展严格匹配对照的CMT课程。数据采集的核心目标为验证训练课程的短期即时效果与长期课程效果。 本数据集为Lymeus等人2022年发表于《Frontiers in Psychology》的分析工作提供了核心数据支撑，其论文题为《自然环境下基于正念的恢复性技能训练（ReST）与传统正念训练对比：6个月随访中的持续优势》。需注意的是，部分标记为T1与T2的变量可从关联数据集（https://doi.org/10.5878/p34t-9j15）中获取，这些变量曾被Lymeus等人用于2020年发表于《Frontiers in Psychology》的另一项研究，其论文题为《自然环境下基于正念的恢复性技能训练（ReST）与传统正念训练对比：五周课程后的心理机能变化》，并在2022年的随访分析中被作为背景数据复用。 本次数据采集覆盖了两类五周正念训练课程的三个关键时间节点：训练前、训练结束即刻，以及训练结束六个月后。两类课程分别为恢复性技能训练（ReST）与传统正念训练（CMT），参与者被随机分配至其中一组。研究对象为存在压力或注意力问题的在校大学生。本次研究共开展四轮数据采集，期间ReST课程持续迭代优化。本数据集仅纳入了第2至4轮数据采集阶段完成任意一门课程的参与者（N=97）。数据集包含存在部分缺失值的原始数据，以及30套通过多重插补法生成的完整数据。 本次数据采集采用了以下自评量表：五维度正念问卷（Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, FFMQ；参考Baer等人2006年发表于《Assessment》的研究《利用自评评估方法探索正念的不同维度》，载于Assessment 13(1):27-45）、认知失败问卷（Cognitive Failures Questionnaire, CFQ；参考Broadbent等人1982年发表于《British Journal of Clinical Psychology》的研究《认知失败问卷（CFQ）及其相关因素》，载于British Journal of Clinical Psychology 21(1):1-16），以及知觉压力量表（Perceived Stress Scale；参考Cohen等人1983年发表于《Journal of Health and Social Behavior》的研究《知觉压力的全域测评工具》，载于Journal of Health and Social Behavior 24(4):385-396）。