Effects of the Interculturality and Mindfulness Program (PIM) on University Students: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript addresses an important topic of how an inter-cultural and mindfulness program could help with widespread mental health issues of college students, including stress, anxiety, depression, and loneliness. The experimental design included three groups with different teaching modalities, in person, synchronous online, and passive control. The study is also important to evaluate how different teaching strategies may influence affect. Both in-person and online modalities seem to be beneficial for the emotional regulation of students, and increased positive affect (i.e., optimism).

The research main limitations acknowledged by the authors included students "were not randomly assigned to groups, and heterogeneity in nationality, education and sex."

I think it would have been interesting to include an “Asynchronous Online Group,” since both Online Synchronous and In-person have more opportunities for interactions that could have a positive effect on emotions compared to Asynchronous modalities that could perpetuate the feeling of isolation, loneliness and depression.

It is not clear what the control group is. A clarification of what “Passive Control” and “wait-list group for the Soft Skills 189 for Life Program” mean would be important to include in the revision.

Overall, the study is well conducted and addresses an important topic related to mental health in college education.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. A comparison with an “Asynchronous Online Group” would really be quite interesting. 

A clarification of the control group was added in the end of the second paragraph of the “Procedures” session, as it follows: “Therefore, the CG students answered the instruments six weeks prior to the Soft Skills Program to enroll in it and, consequently, completed the post-test before the beginning of the intervention; constituting a passive control group.” We hope it has elucidated the matter.

Best Regards,

The authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Rates of mental health issues have been increasing among university students.

The authors investigated the effects of the Interculturality and Mindfulness Program (PIM) on academic students on mindfulness, emotional regulation, depression, anxiety, stress, life satisfaction, optimism, positive solitude, and loneliness. A quasi-experimental research was conducted, with pre and post-test comparative measurements in three groups: in-person (IG), synchronous online (OG), and passive control (CG). A diverse group of students participated from two universities in Portugal. When compared to the CG, both active groups (IG and OG) have shown a beneficial interaction effect in acceptance, positive solitude, optimism, and mindfulness. The IG demonstrated a positive interaction effect in awareness and satisfaction with life, whereas the OG indicated a favorable interaction effect in impulse. When analyzing the intra-group effects, both active groups presented a significant improvement in stress, emotion regulation, mindfulness, positive solitude, and optimism. The OG demonstrated an improvement in the awareness to emotional responses and loneliness.

The authors reported that this research main limitations are students were not randomly assigned and groups were heterogeneous in nationality, education level and sex. Nonetheless, PIM has indicated beneficial results in both IG and OG and is a promising intervention for the prevention of mental health issues (e.g., stress, difficulties in emotional regulation, and loneliness), as well as for the promotion of well-being (e.g., positive solitude, mindfulness, life satisfaction, and optimism).

 

The article is interesting.

I have some minor suggestions:

1.       Rearrange and smooth the abstract. It must better summarize the sections

2.       Describe Figure 1 and 2 in details

3.       Section 2.5 is not clear. Is it a module? In this case rearrange it using also a picture

4.       “Figure 1. PIM’s pre and post-test progression of each variable means” check the number and improve the resolution

5.       Insert the conclusions

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Your recommendations were important to improve the manuscript.

Considering your suggestions:

• We have made some minor changes in the abstract to better summarize the sections (introduction, objectives, design, procedures, results, limitations and conclusions);
• The Figures 1 and 2 description was inserted in a paragraph of the Discussion section (389-395) as it follows: “When analyzing student’s adherence (figures 1 and 2), it is noticed that drop-out rates were substantially greater in the OG than in the IG between enrollment and pre-test (T0 – T1). It may have occurred since registrations in the online groups were disseminated more widely over the internet than in the in-person groups. On the other hand, in the post and follow-up tests ratio (T2-T2), which is presented in a study that compared both interventions [41], the IG had a higher drop-out rate than the OG. The higher difficulty for participants to be present at the follow-up in-person meetings might have been its main reason.”;
• Section 2.5 is a description of the intervention, which is part of the Procedures. Therefore, it was changed to section 2.3.1;
• The number was corrected in the “PIM’s pre and post-test progression of each variable means” figure to Figure 3 and its resolution was improved, as well;
• The conclusions section was included;

The updated manuscript is attached.

Best Regards,

The Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf