Interplay Between Mindfulness and Metacognition - How Self-Awareness Affects Perceived Stress

Southampton Solent University
Faculty of Business, Sport, and Enterprise
School of Health, Exercise and Social Science
BSc (Hons) Psychology

2014-2015
Jack Rayner
“Interplay between mindfulness and
metacognition: How self-awareness
affects perceived stress”
Supervisor : Lara Webber

Date of presentation : April 2015
Mindfulness, metacognition and stress 2
Contents
Acknowledgements 3
Abstract 4
Introduction 5
Method 12
 Design 12
 Participants 12
 Materials 13
 Procedure 14
 Ethical considerations 15
 Analyses 15
Results 17
 Mindfulness and perceived stress 18
 Mindfulness and metacognition 20
 Metacognition and perceived stress 20
 Areas of metacognition 20
Discussion 22
 Mindfulness and metacognition 22
 Mindfulness and perceived stress 23
 Metacognition and perceived stress 24
 Areas of metacognition 25
 Interplay between variables and implications of 25
the research
 Limitations of the study 27
 Conclusion 28
References 30
Appendices 36
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my immeasurable gratitude to Lara Webber for

providing fantastic guidance and support throughout the completion of this
project. I would also like to thank Dr Rhodri Davies for assisting with my
statistical analysis, and Yasmin Zaman for developing my practice and interest
in mindfulness.
I would also like to give thanks to all of my family and friends for their support
throughout the project, in particular to my stepmother Karen Rayner who
provided vital help with copy editing and proofreading.
Abstract
Mindfulness has been associated with a variety of positive psychological and

clinical outcomes, particularly in the reduction of stress. Metacognition has
also been associated with mindfulness, but the relationship between the
subsets of metacognition and both mindfulness and stress are not yet fully
understood. A correlational study was conducted in order to investigate
whether one of the two subsets of metacognition, knowledge and regulation,
was more closely associated with the change in perceived stress associated
with mindfulness. Links were established between metacognitive knowledge
and stress, with those scoring higher on metacognitive knowledge reporting
lower stress scores. Previous results linking higher mindfulness scores with’
reduced stress were replicated, and neither metacognitive subset was found
to show a significant relationship with mindfulness. The present study
indicates that established links between mindfulness and stress are not
causally related to metacognition. Directions for future research are
suggested, and limitations are identified.
Introduction
This study aims to answer questions regarding the relationship between

mindfulness, metacognition, and perceived stress amongst university students.
Mindfulness as a discipline has grown in popularity in the past decade, and
has been shown in previous research to be effective in reducing the symptoms
of conditions including anxiety disorder and depression (Hofmann, Sawyer,
Witt & Oh, 2010), as well as in helping individuals cope with day-to-day stress
(Palmer & Rodger, 2009; Kabat-Zinn, 1990), and alleviating dysphoric mood
(Broderick 2005). Mindfulness has its roots in the Buddhist concept of sati, or
intentness of mind, and has been considered as the “heart” of Buddhist
meditations (Thera, 1962). It is crucial when conducting empirical research on
the subject to define in specific terms what is meant by mindfulness, but
researchers have yet to reach a consensus on how the concept should be
defined. In order to properly interpret the existing literature, and remove
ambiguity in this research, an overview of current definitions and practices will
be presented alongside a description of the development of mindfulness from
Eastern religious concepts and an evaluation of the relevance of mindfulness
amongst a cohort of university students.
In Baer’s (2003) review of mindfulness training as a clinical intervention,

the concept is defined as “the non-judgmental observation of the on-going
stream of internal and external stimuli as they arise” (p. 125). Whilst this is a
very broad definition, the idea of non-judgmental observation is particularly
useful in understanding how modern mindfulness practice has developed: in
Western society, Buddhist language and traditions may be difficult for the
layperson to understand, whereas a universally applicable concept such as
non-judgmental observation allows researchers, clinicians and teachers to
communicate these concepts separately to their religious and cultural context
(Kabat-Zinn, 1982). In many ways, mindfulness can be seen as a Western
adaptation of Buddhist principles, particularly that of dharma, which concerns
the causes of human suffering and the methods that can be employed to resist
or reverse these causes. Kabat-Zinn (2003) argues that dharma, whilst not
often explicitly referred to in Western culture, is a universal concept that acts
as a description of practices which aim to train the mind via the “faculty of
mindful attention” (p. 145). We can see from this description that, whilst
mindfulness as a clinical and psychological practice has only come into
existence in the last few decades, the practices and beliefs that underline the
idea have existed and developed for millennia.
Whilst it is useful to appreciate the longevity and history of the concept

of mindfulness and its relationship with Buddhist tradition, Kabat-Zinn (2003)
also provides what is described as an operational working definition, which
may be more appropriate in considering modern mindfulness practice: “The
awareness that emerges through paying attention on purpose, in the present
moment, and non-judgmentally to the unfolding of experience moment by
moment” (p. 145). Another, given by Shapiro, Schwartz and Bonner (1998),
describes mindfulness as “a conscious moment to moment awareness,
cultivated by systematically paying attention on purpose” (p. 583), and Bishop
et al. (2004) propose a two-component model of mindfulness, where one
aspect involves the regulation of attention and deliberate focus on the present
moment, and the other involves experiencing one’s emotions and thoughts
with an attitude of acceptance, non-judgment and curiosity. Whilst the exact
wording of definitions varies between researchers, most tend to refer
specifically to cultivating awareness through paying deliberate or on purpose
attention to the present moment. In the two most widely practiced modern
mindfulness training courses, Mindfulness-based Stress Reduction (MBSR)
and Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), these principles are taught
through a mixture of breathing and stretching exercises, focus skills, and
meditation practices (Be Mindful, n.d.). MBSR is used more widely to reduce
day-to-day anxiety and stress in a non-clinical environment, whereas MBCT is
used more commonly in patients with depression diagnoses, particularly in
those who have experienced recurring depressive episodes (Teasdale, Segal,
& Williams, 2003).
Whilst consensus on the exact definition of the concept is yet to be

reached, there is a wealth of evidence supporting the benefits that being
mindful can provide. Research supports the effectiveness of MBSR and MBCT
therapies in reducing the symptoms of anxiety disorder and depression in a
clinical setting (Hofmann, Sawyer, Witt & Oh, 2010; Barnhofer et al., 2009), as
well as reducing rumination and improving emotion regulation (Chambers, Lo
& Allen, 2008; Ramel, Goldin, Carmona & McQuaid, 2004) and increasing
activity in areas of the brain associated with positive effect (Davidson et al.,
2003). Trait mindfulness has been shown to have a negative relationship with
perceived stress (Palmer & Rodger, 2009) and similarly, MBSR training has
been shown to reduce perceived stress (Shapiro, Astin, Bishop & Cordova,
2005).
The relationship between mindfulness and perceived stress is of

particular importance when considering the student population. According to a
survey by Associated Press and mtvU (2009), 85% of students report
experiencing stress on a daily basis, with 19% reporting feeling so stressed
that they were unable to complete work “several times”. Given that stress is a
risk factor in psychological and physiological health problems ranging from
depression (Gregus, Wintink, Davis & Kalynchuk, 2005) to coronary artery
disease (Krantz, Whittaker & Sheps, 2011), researching methods of stress
reduction that are applicable to the student population seems of paramount
importance. Previous research on mindfulness and perceived stress amongst
a student population suggests that individuals who show high levels of trait
mindfulness will report experiencing less perceived stress, as well as being
more likely to engage in rational coping styles (Palmer & Rodger, 2009). The
particular relevance of mindfulness-based interventions in reducing stress
amongst a student population is further highlighted by Rosenzweig et al.
(2003) in a study of second-year medical students. The researchers reported
that as their participants approached their final examinations (a period during
which healthy students will commonly report clinically significant anxiety
symptoms), the experimental group who were completing an MBSR course
reported lower stress levels than baseline scores, compared to a control group
whose stress scores increased significantly. This indicates both the potential of
mindfulness in improving well-being amongst a student cohort, and the
importance of achieving a greater understanding of how these practices work
effectively.
Consensus has yet to be reached regarding the mechanisms of change

that produce the positive effects associated with higher levels of mindfulness,
but research suggests that it may involve how mindfulness training promotes
metacognitive awareness (Corcoran, Farb, Anderson & Segal, 2009).
Metacognition is the ability to be aware of one’s own thought processes and
feelings from an emotionally detached perspective, so that thoughts are
experienced not as precise reflections of reality, but as “mental events” which
the individual can act on out of choice, rather than out of instinctive reaction
(Teasdale, Segal & Williams, 1995). When considering the non-judgmental
awareness of one’s thoughts and emotions that is promoted in mindfulness
training, it can be seen how the two are conceptually related, as both relate to
being aware of one’s own thoughts, feelings and mental processes, and being
able to manage these effectively.
Metacognitive awareness can be split into cognitive knowledge and

cognitive regulation (Schraw, 1998). To use an example, an instance of using
cognitive knowledge would be the knowledge that it may be more difficult to
understand a concept if it is read from a scientific journal, than if it was read
from a newspaper article; An instance of using cognitive regulation would be to
question one’s own understanding of the concept, and to re-read the material
in order to ensure that the concept had been fully understood. Metacognitive
practices have been shown to improve academic performance (Pintrich &
Groot, 1990), and make an individual’s prediction of their own academic
results more accurate (Mair, 2012). However, metacognitive awareness as a
whole has also been shown to positively correlate with both perceived stress
and negative affect (Spada et al., 2008). This poses the question: how can
mindfulness, which focuses on bringing non-judgmental attention to an

individual’s thought processes, help individuals cope with stress, but
metacognition, or the ability to process one’s thoughts at an emotional
distance, exacerbate stress? It is proposed in the present study that the two
sides to metacognition, knowledge and regulation, have entirely different
relationships with both mindfulness and coping with stress.
In order to address this question, the two sides of metacognition must

first be fully understood. Schraw and Dennison (1994), in a study that presents
a method of independently measuring the two aspects of metacognitive ability,
describe the two sides in greater detail. Metacognitive knowledge is broken
down into three sub processes, each centred on a form of knowledge:
declarative knowledge, regarding the strength of one’s own cognitive
strategies; procedural knowledge, or knowing how to implement these
strategies, and conditional knowledge, or awareness of when to use them.
Metacognitive regulation, on the other hand, is described as a mix of
“planning, information management strategies, comprehension monitoring,
debugging strategies, and evaluation” (p.460). Planning refers to the ability to
set goals and allocate resources, information management strategies refers to
organisation, summarizing, and similar strategies used to process information,
and comprehension monitoring refers to ongoing analysis of one’s thought
processes. Debugging strategies are skills used to correct errors and identify
weaknesses, and evaluation refers to self-analysis after learning.
One explanation as to why metacognition can improve academic

performance, but also increase perceived stress, is presented by Goran,
Mostafaei and Rezaei (2012) in a study of Iranian high school students. It is
proposed that those individuals who would consider themselves to be under a
high level of academic stress would be more inclined to “apply effective
learning strategies more frequently in relation to the learners with lower stress”
(p. 5698). Indeed, Pintrich and Groot (1990), in a study of the learning
behaviours of secondary school pupils from Michigan, found that test anxiety
can be used, amongst other variables such as self-efficacy (which is certainly

a metacognitive principle), as a predictor of academic performance. Whilst this
does not entirely explain if and how metacognitive awareness causes stress
outside of an academic context, it certainly provides a theory for how, in some
contexts, self-awareness can cause negative emotion whilst also boosting
performance.
Mindfulness training, on the other hand, has been shown to improve

academic performance amongst both healthy school students (Bakosh, Snow,
Tobias, Houlihan & Barbosa-Leiker, 2015) and adolescents with learning
disabilities, whilst also decreasing anxiety (Beauchemin, Hutchins & Patterson,
2008). This once again poses an interesting contradiction: how can one type of
“self-efficacy” or “self-awareness” improve academic performance, but at the
expense of increased stress, whilst another can improve both outcomes?
There were two primary aims behind exploring this issue. The first was to
contribute to the knowledge of the ways in which mindfulness can affect an
individual’s metacognition, and allow for greater understanding of how different
forms of self-awareness and reflection can affect an individual’s perceived
stress levels. The second was to add to the literature regarding the
mechanisms of mindfulness and whether metacognition plays a part in how
mindfulness affects stress.
In order to approach the question, this study explored the relationships

between four variables: mindfulness, metacognitive knowledge, metacognitive
regulation, and perceived stress. Due to the conceptual similarities between
mindfulness and metacognitive knowledge (as opposed to metacognitive
regulation, which is more closely related to learning strategies than awareness
of mental events), and the evidence that suggests that metacognition as a
whole increases stress, it was proposed that the relationship between the two
aspects of metacognition would show different relationships with stress, with
knowledge correlating negatively. The hypotheses tested were as follows:
1: Trait mindfulness will negatively correlate with perceived stress
2: Trait mindfulness will positively correlate with total metacognition

3: Total metacognition will positively correlate with perceived stress
4: Metacognitive knowledge will negatively correlate with perceived
stress
Research question: how do mindfulness and metacognition relate to perceived

stress?
Method
Design
A correlational, within-subjects design was employed to study how

participants’ trait mindfulness and metacognitive ability related to their
perceived stress levels. The research questions were approached through
Pearson correlation and regression analysis. The three predictor variables
involved in the research were, level of metacognitive awareness (across three
dimensions: procedural knowledge, declarative knowledge, and conditional
knowledge), level of metacognitive regulation (across five dimensions:

information management strategies, debugging strategies, planning,
comprehension monitoring, and evaluation) and level of trait mindfulness. The
effect of these three predictors on the criterion variable, perceived stress, was
investigated.
Participants
20 participants were recruited for the study, all of whom were students
of Southampton Solent University. Participants were recruited using
opportunistic sampling, via the university’s participation pool. 85% (17) of the
participants were female, 15% (3) were male. The mean age was 21.80 years
(SD = 5.46 range = 18 to 42). 55% (11) of the participants had no previous
experience with mindfulness training, meditation, yoga or any other related
practices. Of the 9 who did have experience in these areas, 7 had practiced
yoga; one participated in yoga and meditation groups as part of inpatient
recovery whilst supervising patients in a clinical setting, and one had “several
years’” (Appendix K) experience in meditation and Kundalini yoga, including
two weeks living as a monk at a Vipassana meditation centre. Participants
were awarded 30 minutes participation time as an incentive to participate in
the study, in line with the university’s policy on participant recruitment.
Materials
The study included four questionnaires to assess participants’ levels of
trait mindfulness, metacognitive ability and perceived stress. Participants were
also asked to provide demographic information as well as describing the
previous experience (if any) they may have had with mindfulness training or
related disciplines (Appendix B).
Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) (Brown & Ryan, 2003)

(Appendix C). The MAAS is a 15-item measure consisting of a 6-point scale
(1= almost always, 6= almost never), designed to record participants’ level of

trait mindfulness. The scale is scored by computing a mean of the 15 items,
giving a score out of 6. Higher scores reflect higher levels of dispositional
mindfulness. The MAAS has yielded high validity and reliability amongst
student populations (MacKillop & Anderson, 2007).
Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) (Schraw & Dennison, 1994)

(Appendix D). The MAI is a 52-item measure consisting of a 2-point ‘true or
false’ scale, designed to record participants’ level of metacognitive ability.
Each item on the scale records one of eight areas of metacognitive ability:
procedural, declarative and conditional knowledge (the three areas which are
grouped into metacognitive knowledge), or information management
strategies, debugging strategies, planning, comprehension monitoring, and
evaluation (the five areas which are grouped into metacognitive regulation).
The scale is scored by computing the total ‘true’ answers for each of the eight
areas, which are randomized throughout the scale. The MAI has been shown
to be reliable (α=.90) and inter-correlated (r=.54) in previous studies amongst
student populations (Schraw & Dennison, 1994). It is important to note that
what is referred to in the present study as metacognitive awareness is referred
to in the MAI as metacognitive knowledge, with the word “awareness” being
used to describe metacognitive ability in general.
10-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) (Cohen, Kamarck &

Mermelstein, 1983) (Appendix E). The PSS-10 is a 10-item measure
consisting of a 5-point scale (0= never, 4= very often) designed to record the
degree to which situations in participants’ lives are appraised as stressful. The
scale is scored by obtaining reverse scores (0=4, 1=3, 2=2, 3=1, 4=0) to the
four positively stated items (positively stated items include statements such as
“How often have you felt that things were going your way?” in contrast to the
remaining six negatively stated items, which include statements such as “How
often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your
life?”), then computing the total score across all scale items. The PSS-10 has
yielded high reliability (α=.89) and inter-correlation (r=.58) in previous

assessment of student populations (Roberti, Harrington & Storch, 2006).
Procedure
Participants were approached for recruitment electronically via the
Southampton Solent University participation pool, using a forum post detailing
the study’s requirements, means of contacting the researcher and the
incentive offered for participation. After a potential participant had declared
his/her interest, an information sheet was provided via email (Appendix H),
and consent was given via electronic signature on the information sheet.
Participants were assigned a participation number to ensure anonymity, then
were sent the MAAS, MAI, PSS-10, and demographic information
questionnaire in an email pack with accompanying message providing
instructions on how to complete the study. In order to minimize order effects
and counteract the effects of respondent fatigue on the data, the email packs
were counterbalanced so that the order in which the measures were presented
differed between participants. After reception of the completed email packs by
the researcher, participants were provided with a debrief form detailing the
purpose of the research, thanking them for participation, and providing contact
details should they require further information (Appendix I). After results were
collated and the deadline for participant withdrawal had passed, participant
numbers and contact details were deleted.
Ethical Considerations
Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Southampton Solent
Psychology Ethics Committee (Appendix F) and a tutor assigned to the
researcher supervised the process of obtaining approval. The Ethics
Committee agreed that all BPS guidelines had been met in the preparation
and conduction of the study. Confidentiality was maintained by collecting
minimal demographic information from the participants, who remained
anonymous at all times. Participants were university students and as such,
were all over the age of 18, and were offered no incentive to take part in the
study other than through the participation time system employed by the
university.
The main ethical issue identified in this study was the potentially
sensitive nature of asking individuals to indicate to the researcher their
perceived level of stress. If a participant was particularly stressed or anxious at
the time of completing the study this may have caused mild psychological
distress. In order to address this issue, participants were fully informed of their
right to withdraw from the study at any time, and the nature of the study was
explained comprehensively in the research information sheet. Additionally,
contact details for the university’s pastoral support network were provided to
ensure any participants who may have been negatively affected by the study
were aware of the services available to them should they have required further
assistance. The only potential risk to the researcher that was identified was the
nature of extended lone work which, if problems arose, could have been
addressed through the university’s support network.
Analysis
The results were analysed using Pearson correlations and regression
analysis. Pearson correlations were used to identify the individual relationships
between the four variables, in order to answer the research question of how
mindfulness relates to the two elements of metacognitive awareness.
Regression analysis was used to determine how mindfulness and the two
elements of metacognitive ability can be used as predictors of perceived stress
levels.
Results
A Cronbach’s alpha test was conducted for each measure in order to

assess their internal consistencies for the study. All measures were found to
be reliable. The MAAS was found to be the most internally consistent (α=.88),
with an almost equally reliable alpha score found for the PSS-10 (α=.87).
Whilst the Cronbach’s alpha score for the MAI was not quite as high, it still
displays acceptable levels of internal consistency (α=.79) (Cronbach, 1951).
Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations of the scores for
mindfulness, overall metacognitive ability and perceived stress, as well as the
normative scores for mindfulness and perceived stress. As previous research
has identified, adequate normative data for the MAI to draw comparisons is
not available (Schraw, 2000; Doyle, 2013). The mean perceived stress scores
in the present study are 50.7% greater than normative mean scores,
suggesting an abnormally stressed group of participants. Factors contributing
to this score could include the far greater proportion of women included in the
research, or the exclusive participation of university students in the study, as
both groups tend to score more highly on the PSS-10 (Palmer & Rodger,
2009).
Table 1. Descriptive statistics and normative scores
Variable Present study scores Normative scores
M SD M SD
Mindfulness 3.44 .78 3.83* .69*

(MAAS)
Metacognitive 34.50 7.54 N/A N/A

awareness (MAI)
Perceived Stress 21.4 8.1 14.2** 6.2**

(PSS-10)
*Normative mean and S.D. for university students (Brown & Ryan, 2003)
**Normative mean and S.D. for age 18-25 (Cohen & Janicki-Deverts, 2012)
Mindfulness and perceived stress
In line with the researcher’s hypothesis, a Pearson’s r test showed a

significant negative correlation between trait mindfulness and perceived stress
(r(20)=-.646, p=<0.01). Additionally, a multiple regression was executed in
order to assess the impact that predictor variables mindfulness, metacognitive
awareness and metacognitive regulation had on criterion variable stress
(Table 2). It was found that mindfulness was the best predictor of variance in
perceived stress (β=-0.59, p=<.01), with neither metacognitive knowledge (β=-
0.34, p>.05) or regulation (β=0.22, p>0.5) significantly contributing to
perceived stress scores.
Variables Stress Mindfulness Awareness Regulation B β sr2 (unique)
(DV)
Mindfulness -.65 -0.614** -0.594 .28
Awareness -.46 .31 -0.758 -0.336 .08
Regulation -.30 .44 .49 0.223 0.120 .01
Intercept = 46.624
Mean 21.40 3.44 21.10 22.85 R2=.50a

Adjusted R2=.41
R=.71
S.D. 8.09 0.78 3.58 4.34
***p<.001 **p<.01 *p<.05
a
Unique variability = .37; shared variability = .13
Table 2. Predicting levels of perceived stress: Regression analysis
Mindfulness and metacognition

Using a Pearson’s r test, an insignificant positive correlation was
observed between mindfulness and total metacognition (r(20)=.326, p>0.05).
This is contrary to predictions that the two variables would show a significant
positive relationship. Insignificant positive correlations were also found
between mindfulness and metacognitive knowledge (r(20)=.311, p>.05) and
regulation (r(20)=.439, p>.05) separately.
Metacognition and perceived stress

It was predicted that participants with higher metacognitive knowledge
scores would score lower on perceived stress. Using a further Pearson’s r
test, it was found that metacognitive knowledge shows a significant negative
correlation with perceived stress (r(20)=-.463, p<.05), supporting the
hypothesis. An insignificant negative relationship was observed between total
metacognition and perceived stress, contrary to predictions (r(20)=-.326,
p>.05). Metacognitive regulation and perceived stress also showed an
insignificant negative correlation (r(20)=-.304, p>.05).
Areas of metacognition
Table 3 shows the Pearson’s r values for each subset of metacognitive
awareness in relation to mindfulness and stress scores. Two significant
relationships were observed: A significant positive correlation between
planning (the subset of metacognitive regulation related to goal-setting and
allocation of resources) and mindfulness, and a significant negative correlation
between conditional knowledge (the subset of metacognitive knowledge
related to knowing when and why to apply one’s skills) and stress.
Table 3. Pearson correlations for metacognition subsets and trait mindfulness

and perceived stress scores
Mindfulness Stress
Procedural .275 -.234
Declarative .150 -.298
Conditional .424 -.712**
Information Management .130 -.029
Debugging .319 -.293
Planning .535* -.216
Comprehension .184 -.168
Evaluation .184 -.328
*p=<0.05
**p=<0.01
Discussion
The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between trait
mindfulness and stress in relation to the two separate areas of metacognitive
ability, attempting to establish a greater understanding of the differences in the
two metacognitive subsets in relation to stress, and to contribute to the
existing literature regarding the possible mechanisms of mindfulness. The final
part of this report will explore the findings outlined above in relation to
previous literature, and the implications of the data will be analysed.
Additionally, suggestions for future research will be discussed as well as
limitations of the study.
Mindfulness and metacognition

One of the main objectives of the present study was to attempt to
ascertain whether an increase in either metacognitive knowledge or regulation
would be associated with an increase in mindfulness. This data would provide
evidence for or against the idea that one of the two subsets could act as a
mechanism by which mindfulness training reduces an individual’s perceived
stress, as suggested by Corcoran et al. (2009). If this were the case, it would
be expected that one of the subsets of metacognitive awareness would
correlate positively with mindfulness, but negatively with perceived stress
scores. The results do not support this hypothesis: metacognitive knowledge
and metacognitive regulation both showed insignificant positive correlations
with mindfulness. Whilst some positive relationship has been observed, a
significant result would be required in order to suggest that the results support
the theory presented in the Corcoran et al. (2009) study. This data could be
explained in terms of how mindfulness-based practices affect metacognition
separately to trait mindfulness. Teasdale et al. (2002) found that after
completing an MBCT course, participants showed an increase in
metacognitive awareness, adding support to the idea that mindfulness-based
practices increase metacognition. One participant in the present study had
practiced Kundalini yoga for “several years, and meditated for several more”
(Appendix K). This participant scored the highest amongst the cohort in both
trait mindfulness and total metacognition, and whilst the experiences of an
individual cannot be extrapolated to apply to a general population, it raises
questions regarding how mindful practices could affect metacognition and trait
mindfulness through separate mechanisms, particularly as yoga has been
shown in previous research to increase levels of trait mindfulness (Shelov,
Suchday & Friedberg, 2009). A suggestion for future research would be to
investigate how metacognition mediates the change in trait mindfulness
produced by either MBSR, MBCT, or other practices such as yoga which are
known to increase trait mindfulness.
Mindfulness and perceived stress

The first correlational result observed in the present study found a
statistically significant negative relationship between mindfulness and
perceived stress. Participants who were more mindful in how they perform
day-to-day actions (irrespective of their experience with mindfulness as a
practice) considered themselves under less stress than those whose answers
showed lower mindfulness scores. This supports previous research that
indicates that trait mindfulness is associated with lower appraisal of stress
levels (Palmer & Rodger, 2009) and that training mindfulness through
programs such as MBSR similarly reduces stress (Shapiro et al., 2005;
Rosenzweig et al., 2003). This result replicates the findings of several
previous studies which have supported the notion that mindfulness reduces
stress and other negative emotions as well as improving clinical outcomes
related to stress (Kabat-Zinn, 1990; Broderick, 2005; Teasdale et al., 2003). In
particular, this result supports the findings of Rosenzweig et al. (2003), whose
results indicated that mindfulness reduces stress and anxiety amongst
university students. This is of particular importance as students tend to report
high levels of stress (Associated Press & mtvU, 2009) and tend to use
avoidant coping styles (Blake & Vandiver, 1988). As mindfulness has been
shown to promote adaptive coping styles in university students (Broderick,
2005), this further highlights the relevance and usefulness of mindfulness in

reducing academic stress in a non-clinical student population.
Metacognition and perceived stress

It was hypothesized that high levels of total metacognition would be
positively associated with perceived stress. An insignificant negative
relationship between the two variables was found, contrary to predictions.
Participants who displayed higher levels of metacognitive awareness were not
significantly more stressed than those who scored lower on the MAI. This
result disputes previous research that has shown a positive relationship
between metacognition and stress (Spada et al., 2008). This result could be
due to demand characteristics, as participants were university students who
may have been inclined to portray themselves as effective metacognitive
learners whilst not necessarily considering themselves as stressed. Orne
(1962) suggests that university students in particular, when participating in
psychological research, “tend to share (with the experimenter) the hope and
expectation that the study in which they are participating will in some material
way contribute to science” (p. 778), increasing demand characteristics. This
could be particularly applicable in research such as the present study where
related psychological concepts are hypothesized to correlate oppositely with a
third variable, as a participant who displays demand characteristics may
assume that the researcher is expecting the two concepts to share a similar
relationship.
It was predicted that the metacognitive knowledge subset would

correlate negatively with perceived stress. The results support this hypothesis,
as a significant negative relationship was observed between the two variables.
Participants who scored higher on metacognitive knowledge appraised lower
stress levels to their own life, despite the insignificant relationship observed
between total metacognition and stress. Whilst there is little existing
correlational research on how metacognitive knowledge in particular relates to
perceived stress, the decrease in stress observed in the present study could
be explained in terms of the current literature on metacognition: Pintrich

(2002) posits that a higher level of metacognitive knowledge leads to more
efficient use of an individual’s mental resources. One example given by
Pintrich (2002) is that a student with high metacognitive knowledge may
recognise that less informational recall is required for a multiple choice test
than for an essay-based test, allowing him or her to more efficiently allocate
mental resources. As this type of planning behaviour is negatively related to
work strain (Claessens, Eerde, Rutte & Roe, 2004), this could explain the
relationship observed in the present study between the two variables,
suggesting that those with greater metacognitive knowledge are more likely to
allocate their mental resources more efficiently, decreasing their self-appraisal
of stress levels.
Areas of metacognition
Each subset of the two areas of metacognitive awareness were tested
for their correlational relationships with mindfulness and stress. The first
significant relationship observed was a negative correlation between the
conditional knowledge subset and stress. Participants who scored higher on
conditional knowledge generally considered themselves less stressed than
those who scored lower. This result is in line with Pintrich’s (2002) data, and
adds further support to the idea described above that the mechanism through
which metacognitive knowledge reduces perceived stress is related to an
improvement in the ability to efficiently apply one’s strengths to a task. Schraw
& Dennison (1994) define the conditional knowledge subset as the ability to
determine “under what circumstances specific processes or skills should
transfer” and “knowledge about when and why to use learning procedures” (p.
460).
Interplay between variables and implications of the research

Corcoran et al. (2009) suggest that an increase in metacognition could
act as one of the mechanisms by which mindfulness-based treatments reduce
negative affect, and Garland (2007) also presents metacognition as a factor in
how mindfulness reduces stress. Additionally, a study by Teasdale et al.

(2002) tested levels of metacognitive awareness in patients who were in
remission or recovery from major depression, and found that those who
completed an MBCT course showed greater metacognitive awareness, as
well as being less likely to relapse into depression after the course had
completed. However, as the study did not account for subsets of
metacognition, it is unclear which metacognitive skills in particular were
associated with the completion of the MBCT course. Whilst this evidence
supports the notion that higher metacognition scores are associated with
improved clinical outcomes, other studies have suggested that a positive
relationship exists between metacognition and stress. The results presented
by Goran et al. (2012) suggest that those who consider themselves to be
stressed are more likely to utilize metacognitive learning strategies, and
Spada et al. (2008) directly reported significant positive correlations between
metacognition and perceived stress. These studies, when considered
together, are extremely conflicting in their suggestion that metacognition both
increases perceived stress and is a product of positive clinical outcomes in
patients with effect disorders. This apparent contradiction provides further
evidence for the suggestion that the subsets of metacognition play entirely
different roles regarding emotion regulation. Some evidence for this is
provided in the present study, as a significant negative relationship was
observed between the knowledge subset of metacognition and perceived
stress, and not the regulation subset.
Alongside the existing evidence described above that has linked
metacognition as a whole to an increase in perceived stress, it is suggested
that an individual’s level of metacognitive knowledge could play a completely
separate role in emotion control to metacognitive regulation. However, as
Garland (2007) states, the evidence provided in the research does not prove a
causal link between the two. The results provided in the present study are
useful in providing additional evidence that suggests some link between
metacognition and how mindfulness reduces the appraisal of stress; the
suggestion that this mechanism involves an increase in metacognitive
knowledge is purely speculative. A suggestion for future research would be to

further investigate the relationship between metacognitive knowledge and
mindfulness, and how mindfulness-based training courses affect
metacognitive knowledge in particular.
Limitations of the study

This section will address some of the limitations of the present study.
One of the first limitations is that the design of the study was for the most part
correlational, meaning that no causal conclusions can be drawn from the data.
Whilst a negative relationship between metacognitive knowledge and stress
was observed, it is not known whether this is due to the ability of those
possessing greater metacognitive knowledge to control stress, or whether
those who are less stressed are simply more able to apply metacognitive
skills. Likewise, although mindfulness has been shown to reduce stress in the
present study and in previous research, the mechanisms behind stress
reduction cannot be ascertained through correlations: future research should
explore the biological and cognitive effects of mindfulness training in order to
explain the practice’s stress-reductive qualities.
Another limitation on the usefulness of the present study is the single-

faceted nature of the MAAS. Other mindfulness measures, such as the
Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale (Cardaciotto, Herbert, Forman, Moitra &
Farrow, 2008), account for the two-factor model of mindfulness hypothesized
by Bishop et al. (2004). Using the two-factor model may have increased the
validity of the present study by accounting for the differences between types of
mindfulness in their relationship with the remaining variables. Furthermore, the
lack of normative data for the MAI reduces its usefulness in the present study,
as it is impossible to ascertain whether the scores recorded in the present
study are representative of the general population. Access to normative data
for this measure would have increased the generalizability of the present
study.
Thirdly, the statistical power of the present study was limited by the
modest sample size. A post hoc power analysis revealed that, based on the
effect size of the correlation found between metacognitive awareness and
stress (r=.463), an n of 27 would be required to achieve statistical power at the
.80 level advised by Cohen (1988). A replication of this study with increased
sample size would increase the validity of the results. Sample size was
adequate, however, for the effect size of the correlation observed between
mindfulness and stress (power= 0.82).
The final identified limitation of the present study, outlined above, is the
nature of recruiting university students in a study where two conceptually
similar concepts are expected to show opposite correlations to a third variable.
As identified in Orne (1962), students tend to show greater demand
characteristics in the belief that supporting the assumed hypothesis will benefit
the researcher. In the present study, two related psychological concepts
(mindfulness and metacognitive awareness) were predicted to correlate
oppositely with a third variable (stress), meaning that demand characteristics
may have shifted the results against the predictions. Additionally, the
participants in the present study were overwhelmingly female, which may
have affected the results, particularly as female university students have been
shown to report higher perceived stress levels than male counterparts
(Campbell, Svenson & Jarvis, 1992). Repetition of the present study using a
demographically broader group of participants would increase the reliability
and generalizability of the findings.
Conclusion
Mindfulness training is an increasingly valuable tool in the reduction of
stress in clinical and non-clinical settings. Due to the high levels of appraised
stress reported by students, an increase in the understanding and application
of mindfulness in universities would provide improved means by which to
assist students who are affected academically and psychologically by the
stress involved in higher education. This research helped to explain some of

the ways in which mindfulness affects an individual’s self-efficacy and self-
awareness in relation to it’s known benefits, and could provide a springboard
for further research on the mechanisms of mindfulness training and how the
subsets of metacognition relate to the appraisal of stress.
References
Associated Press & mtvU (2009). Economy, college stress and mental health
poll. Retrieved January 20, 2015, from http://www.halfofus.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/10/mtvU-AP-2009-Economy-College-Stress-and-
Mental-Health-Poll-Executive-Summary-May-2009.pdf
Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A

conceptual and empirical review. Clinical psychology: Science and
practice, 10(2), 125-143.
Bakosh, L. S., Snow, R. M., Tobias, J. M., Houlihan, J. L., & Barbosa-Leiker,
C. (2015). Maximizing Mindful Learning: Mindful Awareness Intervention
Improves Elementary School Students’ Quarterly Grades. Mindfulness, 1-9.
Barnhofer, T., Crane, C., Hargus, E., Amarasinghe, M., Winder, R., &
Williams, J. M. G. (2009). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy as a treatment
for chronic depression: A preliminary study. Behaviour research and
therapy, 47(5), 366-373.
Beauchemin, J., Hutchins, T. L., & Patterson, F. (2008). Mindfulness

meditation may lessen anxiety, promote social skills, and improve academic
performance among adolescents with learning disabilities. Complementary
Health Practice Review, 13(1), 34-45.
Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J.
& Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition. Clinical
psychology: Science and practice, 11(3), 230-241.
Blake, R. L., & Vandiver, T. A. (1988). The association of health with stressful
life changes, social supports, and coping. Family practice research journal,
7(4), 205-218.
Broderick, P. C. (2005). Mindfulness and coping with dysphoric mood:

Contrasts with rumination and distraction. Cognitive Therapy and Research,
29(5), 501-510.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present:

mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 84(4), 822.
Broderick, P. C. (2005). Mindfulness and coping with dysphoric mood:

Contrasts with rumination and distraction. Cognitive Therapy and Research,
29(5), 501-510.
Campbell, R. L., Svenson, L. W., & Jarvis, G. K. (1992). Perceived level of

stress among university undergraduate students in Edmonton, Canada.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75(2), 552-554.
Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., & Farrow, V. (2008).
The assessment of present-moment awareness and acceptance: the
Philadelphia mindfulness scale. Assessment, 15(2), 204-223.
Chambers, R., Lo, B. C. Y., & Allen, N. B. (2008). The impact of intensive
mindfulness training on attentional control, cognitive style, and
affect. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32(3), 303-322.
Claessens, B. J., Van Eerde, W., Rutte, C. G., & Roe, R. A. (2004). Planning
behavior and perceived control of time at work. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 25(8), 937-950.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd
ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, S., & Janicki-Deverts, D. (2012). Who's stressed? Distributions of

psychological stress in the United States in probability samples from 1983,
2006, and 20091. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(6), 1320-1334.
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of

perceived stress. Journal of health and social behavior, 385-396.
Corcoran, K. M., Farb, N., Anderson, A., & Segal, Z. V. (2009). Mindfulness
and emotion regulation. Emotion regulation and psychopathology: A
transdiagnostic approach to etiology and treatment, 339-355.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.

psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
Davidson, R. J., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacher, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D.,
Santorelli, S. F., ... & Sheridan, J. F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune
function produced by mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic medicine, 65(4),
564-570.
Doyle, B. (2013). Metacognitive awareness: Impact of a metacognitive

intervention in a pre-nursing course (Doctoral dissertation). Louisiana State
University.
Experience MBSR. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://bemindful.co.uk/mbsr/experience-mbsr/
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of

cognitive–developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906.
Garland, E. L. (2007). The meaning of mindfulness: A second-order

cybernetics of stress, metacognition, and coping. Complementary Health
Practice Review, 12(1), 15-30.
Goran, M., Mostafaei, A. & Rezaei, A. (2012). Investigation of the effect of

instruction of metacognitive knowledge on academic stress. Annals of
Biological Research, 3(12), 5697-5700.
Gregus, A., Wintink, A. J., Davis, A. C., & Kalynchuk, L. E. (2005). Effect of
repeated corticosterone injections and restraint stress on anxiety and
depression-like behavior in male rats. Behavioral brain research, 156(1), 105-
114.
Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A., & Oh, D. (2010). The effect of
mindfulness-based therapy on anxiety and depression: A meta-analytic
review.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 78(2), 169.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1982). An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for

chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation:
Theoretical considerations and preliminary results. General hospital
psychiatry, 4(1), 33-47.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body
and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York: Delacorte
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past,

present, and future. Clinical psychology: Science and practice, 10(2), 144-156.
Krantz, D. S., Whittaker, K. S., & Sheps, D. S. (2011). Psychosocial risk

factors for coronary heart disease: Pathophysiologic mechanisms. Heart and
mind: The practice of cardiac psychology. 2(1), 91-113.
Mair, C. (2012). Helping students succeed through using reflective practice to

enhance metacognition and create realistic predictions. Psychology Teaching
Review, 18(2), 42-46.
MacKillop, J., & Anderson, E. J. (2007). Further psychometric validation of the

mindful attention awareness scale (MAAS). Journal of Psychopathology and
Behavioral Assessment, 29(4), 289-293.
Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment:

With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications.
American psychologist, 17(11), 776.
Palmer, A., & Rodger, S. (2009). Mindfulness, stress, and coping among
university students. Canadian Journal of Counselling and
Psychotherapy/Revue canadienne de counseling et de psychothérapie, 43(3).
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning,

teaching, and assessing. Theory into practice, 41(4), 219-225.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated

learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of
educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Ramel, W., Goldin, P. R., Carmona, P. E., & McQuaid, J. R. (2004). The
effects of mindfulness meditation on cognitive processes and affect in patients
with past depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 28(4), 433-455.
Roberti, J. W., Harrington, L. N., & Storch, E. A. (2006). Further psychometric

support for the 10‐ Item Version of the Perceived Stress Scale. Journal of
College Counseling, 9(2), 135-147.
Rosenzweig, S., Reibel, D. K., Greeson, J. M., Brainard, G. C., & Hojat, M.
(2003). Mindfulness-based stress reduction lowers psychological distress in
medical students. Teaching and learning in medicine, 15(2), 88-92.
Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional

science, 26(1-2), 113-125.
Schraw, G. (2000). Assessing metacognition: Implications of the Buros

symposium. Issues in the Measurement of Metacognition. 8(1), 297-321.
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness.

Contemporary educational psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
Shapiro, S. L., Schwartz, G. E., & Bonner, G. (1998). Effects of mindfulness-

based stress reduction on medical and premedical students. Journal of
behavioral medicine, 21(6), 581-599.
Shapiro, S. L., Astin, J. A., Bishop, S. R., & Cordova, M. (2005). Mindfulness-
based stress reduction for health care professionals: results from a
randomized trial. International Journal of Stress Management, 12(2), 164.
Shelov, D. V., Suchday, S., & Friedberg, J. P. (2009). A pilot study measuring
the impact of yoga on the trait of mindfulness. Behavioural and cognitive
psychotherapy, 37(05), 595-598.
Spada, M. M., Nikčević, A. V., Moneta, G. B., & Wells, A. (2008).

Metacognition, perceived stress, and negative emotion. Personality and
Individual Differences, 44(5), 1172-1181.
Teasdale, J. D., Moore, R. G., Hayhurst, H., Pope, M., Williams, S., & Segal,
Z. V. (2002). Metacognitive awareness and prevention of relapse in
depression: empirical evidence. Journal of consulting and clinical
psychology, 70(2), 275.
Teasdale, J. D., Segal, Z., & Williams, J. M. G. (1995). How does cognitive
therapy prevent depressive relapse and why should attentional control
(mindfulness) training help?. Behaviour Research and therapy, 33(1), 25-39.
Teasdale, J. D., Segal, Z. V., & Williams, J. M. G. (2003). Mindfulness training

and problem formulation. Clinical psychology: Science and practice, 10(2),
157-160.
Thera, N. (2005). The Heart of Buddhist Meditation: Satipaṭṭhāna: a Handbook

of Mental Training Based on the Buddha's Way of Mindfulness, with an
Anthology of Relevant Texts Translated from the Pali and Sanskrit (4th ed.).
Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society.
Appendices
Appendix A – Southampton Solent University psychology resources recruitment post

Appendix B – Demographic and previous mindfulness training questionnaire
Appendix C – Mindful Attention Awareness Scale
Appendix D – Metacognitive Awareness Inventory
Appendix E – 10-item Perceived Stress Scale
Appendix F – Ethical Approval
Appendix G – Standardized email for participants
Appendix H – Research information sheet
Appendix I – Debrief sheet
Appendix J – Full approved ethics form (USB stick)
Appendix K – SPSS output/raw data (USB stick)
Appendix A: Southampton Solent University psychology resources recruitment

post
Hi, my name is Jack Rayner. I am a third year psychology student and I am

asking for your participation in a study regarding mindfulness, metacognition
and stress.
This will involve completing three questionnaires, which will take

approximately 30 minutes, which you will be given as participation time. The
aim of this research is to discover how mindful reflection and metacognition
(thinking about thinking) affects a person’s perceived levels of stress. This
research is potentially sensitive due to the nature of describing one’s levels of
stress. If you think that this may be a sensitive or distressing issue for yourself,
please do not participate in the study.
For further details or to take part in the study please email me at

0raynj59@solent.ac.uk
Appendix B – Demographic and previous mindfulness training questionnaire
Please indicate your age and gender
Age ____
Gender M/F
Have you ever, in the past, taken mindfulness training, or practiced yoga, tai-chi or
meditation?
Mindfulness training Y/N
Yoga, tai-chi, meditation etc. (please specify)

___________________________
Appendix C: Mindful Attention Awareness Scale

Day-to-Day Experiences
Instructions: Below is a collection of statements about your everyday

experience. Using the 1-6 scale below, please indicate how frequently or
infrequently you currently have each experience. Please answer according to
what really reflects your experience rather than what you think your experience
should be. Please treat each item separately from every other item.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Almost Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Almost
Always Frequently Frequently Infrequently Infrequently Never
I could be experiencing some emotion and not be conscious of

it until some time later. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I break or spill things because of carelessness, not paying

attention, or thinking of something else. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I find it difficult to stay focused on what’s happening in the

present. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I tend to walk quickly to get where I’m going without paying

attention to what I experience along the way. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I tend not to notice feelings of physical tension or discomfort

until they really grab my attention. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I forget a person’s name almost as soon as I’ve been told it

for the first time. 1 2 3 4 5 6
It seems I am “running on automatic,” without much awareness

of what I’m doing. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I rush through activities without being really attentive to them. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I get so focused on the goal I want to achieve that I lose touch

with what I’m doing right now to get there. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I do jobs or tasks automatically, without being aware of what

I'm doing. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I find myself listening to someone with one ear, doing

something else at the same time. 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6
Almost Very Somewhat Somewhat Very Almost
Always Frequently Frequently Infrequently Infrequently Never
I drive places on ‘automatic pilot’ and then wonder why I went

there. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I find myself preoccupied with the future or the past. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I find myself doing things without paying attention. 1 2 3 4 5 6
I snack without being aware that I’m eating. 1 2 3 4 5 6
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and
its role in psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 84(4), 822.
Page 40 of 2
Appendix D: Metacognitive Awareness Inventory
Check True or False as appropriate.
True False
1. I ask myself periodically if I am meeting my goals.
2. I consider several alternatives to a problem before I answer.
3. I try to use strategies that have worked in the past.
4. I pace myself while learning in order to have enough time.
5. I understand my intellectual strengths and weaknesses.
6. I think about what I really need to learn before I begin a task
7. I know how well I did once I finish a test.
8. I set specific goals before I begin a task.
9. I slow down when I encounter important information.
10. I know what kind of information is most important to learn.
11. I ask myself if I have considered all options when solving a problem.
12. I am good at organizing information.
13. I consciously focus my attention on important information.
14. I have a specific purpose for each strategy I use.
15. I learn best when I know something about the topic.
16. I know what the teacher expects me to learn.
17. I am good at remembering information.
18. I use different learning strategies depending on the situation.
19. I ask myself if there was an easier way to do things after I finish a task.
20. I have control over how well I learn.
21. I periodically review to help me understand important relationships.
22. I ask myself questions about the material before I begin.
23. I think of several ways to solve a problem and choose the best one.
24. I summarize what I’ve learned after I finish.
25. I ask others for help when I don’t understand something.
26. I can motivate myself to learn when I need to
27. I am aware of what strategies I use when I study.
28. I find myself analyzing the usefulness of strategies while I study.
29. I use my intellectual strengths to compensate for my weaknesses.
30. I focus on the meaning and significance of new information.
31. I create my own examples to make information more meaningful.
Page 41 of 2
32. I am a good judge of how well I understand something.

33. I find myself using helpful learning strategies automatically.
34. I find myself pausing regularly to check my comprehension.
35. I know when each strategy I use will be most effective.
36. I ask myself how well I accomplish my goals once I’m finished.
37. I draw pictures or diagrams to help me understand while learning.
38. I ask myself if I have considered all options after I solve a problem.
39. I try to translate new information into my own words.
40. I change strategies when I fail to understand.
41. I use the organizational structure of the text to help me learn.
42. I read instructions carefully before I begin a task.
43. I ask myself if what I’m reading is related to what I already know.
44. I reevaluate my assumptions when I get confused.
45. I organize my time to best accomplish my goals.
46. I learn more when I am interested in the topic.
47. I try to break studying down into smaller steps.
48. I focus on overall meaning rather than specifics.
49. I ask myself questions about how well I am doing
while I am learning something new.
50. I ask myself if I learned as much as I could have once I finish a task.
51. I stop and go back over new information that is not clear.
52. I stop and reread when I get confused.
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness.

Contemporary educational psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
Page 42 of 2
Appendix E: 10-point Perceived Stress Scale

The questions in this scale ask you about your feelings and thoughts during the
last month. In each case, you will be asked to indicate by circling how often you
felt or thought a certain way.
4 = Very
0 = Never 1 = Almost Never 2 = Sometimes 3 = Fairly Often Often
1. In the last month, how often have you been upset
because of something that happened unexpectedly? .................................. 0 1 2 3 4
2. In the last month, how often have you felt that you were unable
to control the important things in your life? .................................................. 0 1 2 3 4
3. In the last month, how often have you felt nervous and “stressed”? ............ 0 1 2 3 4
4. In the last month, how often have you felt confident about your ability
to handle your personal problems? ............................................................. 0 1 2 3 4
5. In the last month, how often have you felt that things
were going your way?.................................................................................. 0 1 2 3 4
6. In the last month, how often have you found that you could not cope
with all the things that you had to do? ......................................................... 0 1 2 3 4
7. In the last month, how often have you been able

to control irritations in your life? ................................................................... 0 1 2 3 4
8. In the last month, how often have you felt that you were on top of things?.. 0 1 2 3 4
9. In the last month, how often have you been angered

because of things that were outside of your control?................................... 0 1 2 3 4
10. In the last month, how often have you felt difficulties
were piling up so high that you could not overcome them? ......................... 0 1 2 3 4
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived
stress. Journal of health and social behavior, 385-396.
Page 43 of 2
Appendix F: Ethical Approval
Psychology Ethics Committee Decision Form

Applicant: Jack Rayner Supervisor Lara Webber
Co- (if
applicant(s): applicable):
Title Interplay between mindfulness and metacognition: How self-awareness affects

of perceived stress
study:
Submission 12/02/15 Decision date: 12/02/15

date:
Submissio Minor Chair’s Not approved

First
n type: modification action resubmission
submissio
resubmission resubmissio
n
n
Lead Other
reviewer reviewer(s):
:
Decision:
Approved
X
Ethically sound, you have permission to conduct your study.
Minor modifications
Resubmit modified form to the MINOR MODIFICATION link, for your SUPERVISOR to
consider.
Chair’s action
Resubmit modified form to the PEC SUBMISSION link, for the LEAD REVIEWER to
consider.
Page 44 of 2
Not approved, right to resubmit

Resubmit modified form to the PEC SUBMISSION link, for ALL REVIEWERS to consider.
Rejected, no right to resubmit

A NEW application must be made to the PEC SUBMISSION link.
Comments:
A: Applicant Details
B: Study Details
C: Ethical Screening Checklist
D: Participant Recruitment
E: Measures and Materials
F: Procedure
G: Risk to and Protection of Participants
H: Other Risks and Ethical Issues
I: Declaration
Appendices
Missing Information
Any other information:
File: final resubmission is the one that has been approved.
Page 45 of 2
Appendix G – Standardized email for participants
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. Attached is a brief form for you to
complete, after this is sent back I will provide three questionnaires, which should take you
around 30 minutes to complete. If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact
me at 0raynj59@solent.ac.uk.
Page 46 of 2
Appendix H – Research information sheet
Research Information Sheet for Participants
I am Jack Rayner, a third year student at Southampton Solent University. I am requesting

your participation in a study regarding mindfulness, metacognition and stress. This will
involve completing three questionnaires. You will be asked to complete a questionnaire
regarding your mindful awareness, one on your metacognition and one on your perceived
stress levels. Due to the nature of describing the levels of stress you encounter, the
questionnaire on perceived stress could be a potentially sensitive issue for some if you
consider yourself to be very stressed. . You may choose not to answer any question. Personal
information will not be released to or viewed by anyone other than researchers involved in
this project, the marker(s), and in some cases external examiners. Results of this study will
not include your name or any other identifying characteristics.
Your participation is voluntary and you may withdraw your participation at any time before
March 15th 2015. If you choose not to participate there will be no consequences to your mark
or to your treatment as a student in the School of Health Exercise and Social Science,
however you must complete the minimum participation time, although you may choose to
do this in another piece of research.
Please sign below to indicate your consent to participate and also that you understand the
following: That you may withdraw your consent and discontinue participation at any time
without penalty or loss of benefit to yourself. You understand that data collected as part of
this research project will be treated confidentially, and that published results of this research
project will maintain anonymity. In signing consent, you are not waiving your legal claims,
rights, or remedies. A copy of this information sheet will be offered to you.
If you have any questions please ask them now, or contact me Jack Rayner at
0raynj59@solent.ac.uk
You understand that if you have questions about your rights as a participant in this
research, or if you feel that you have been placed at risk, you can contact: Dr Rhodri Davies,
Chair of the Psychology Ethics Committee, Psychology Programme Group, Southampton
Solent University, Southampton, SO14 0RF. Phone: (023) 8201 2057.
Please sign and date here to indicate that you understand the information above and that
you are willing to participate in this study.
Signature [participants signature] Date

Name [participants name]
Page 47 of 2
Appendix I – Debrief sheet
Research Debrief Sheet for Participants
Interplay between mindfulness and metacognition: How self-awareness affects

perceived stress
Debriefing Statement
The aim of this research was to explore how mindfulness and metacognition relate to each
other, and to perceived stress levels. It is expected that metacognitive regulation and
mindfulness will share a positive correlation, and both will share a negative correlation
with perceived stress levels. Your data will help our understanding of methods of self-
awareness and reflection. Once again results of this study will not include your name or
any other identifying characteristics. The experiment/research did not use deception.
You may have a copy of this summary if you wish.
If you have any further questions please contact me Jack Rayner at 0raynj59@solent.ac.uk
Thank you for your participation in this research. If the study has raised any issues that
you have found distressing, help is available at Solent Students 1st, who can be contacted
at students1st.infocentre@solent.ac.uk.
If you have questions about your rights as a participant in this research, or if you feel that
you have been placed at risk, you may contact: Dr Rhodri Davies, Chair of the Psychology
Ethics Committee, Psychology Programme Group, Southampton Solent University,
Southampton, SO14 0RF. Phone: (023) 8201 2057.
Appendix J – Full approved ethics form (on CD-R)
Appendix K – SPSS output/raw data (on CD-R)
Page 48 of 2
Page 49 of 2

Interplay Between Mindfulness and Metacognition - How Self-Awareness Affects Perceived Stress

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Interplay Between Mindfulness and Metacognition - How Self-Awareness Affects Perceived Stress

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Southampton Solent University

Faculty of Business, Sport, and Enterprise

School of Health, Exercise and Social Science

BSc (Hons) Psychology

Supervisor : Lara Webber

I would like to express my immeasurable gratitude to Lara Webber for

Mindfulness has been associated with a variety of positive psychological and

This study aims to answer questions regarding the relationship between

In Baer’s (2003) review of mindfulness training as a clinical intervention,

Whilst it is useful to appreciate the longevity and history of the concept

Whilst consensus on the exact definition of the concept is yet to be

The relationship between mindfulness and perceived stress is of

Consensus has yet to be reached regarding the mechanisms of change

Metacognitive awareness can be split into cognitive knowledge and

mindfulness, which focuses on bringing non-judgmental attention to an

In order to address this question, the two sides of metacognition must

One explanation as to why metacognition can improve academic

can be used, amongst other variables such as self-efficacy (which is certainly

Mindfulness training, on the other hand, has been shown to improve

In order to approach the question, this study explored the relationships

2: Trait mindfulness will positively correlate with total metacognition

Research question: how do mindfulness and metacognition relate to perceived

A correlational, within-subjects design was employed to study how

knowledge), level of metacognitive regulation (across five dimensions:

Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) (Brown & Ryan, 2003)

(1= almost always, 6= almost never), designed to record participants’ level of

Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) (Schraw & Dennison, 1994)

10-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) (Cohen, Kamarck &

yielded high reliability (α=.89) and inter-correlation (r=.58) in previous

A Cronbach’s alpha test was conducted for each measure in order to

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and normative scores

Variable Present study scores Normative scores

Mindfulness 3.44 .78 3.83* .69*

Metacognitive 34.50 7.54 N/A N/A

Perceived Stress 21.4 8.1 14.2** 6.2**

Mindfulness and perceived stress

In line with the researcher’s hypothesis, a Pearson’s r test showed a

Mindfulness -.65 -0.614** -0.594 .28

Awareness -.46 .31 -0.758 -0.336 .08

Regulation -.30 .44 .49 0.223 0.120 .01

Mean 21.40 3.44 21.10 22.85 R2=.50a

***p<.001 **p<.01 *p<.05

Mindfulness and metacognition

Metacognition and perceived stress

Table 3. Pearson correlations for metacognition subsets and trait mindfulness

Mindfulness and metacognition

Mindfulness and perceived stress

2005), this further highlights the relevance and usefulness of mindfulness in

Metacognition and perceived stress

It was predicted that the metacognitive knowledge subset would

be explained in terms of the current literature on metacognition: Pintrich

Interplay between variables and implications of the research

how mindfulness reduces stress. Additionally, a study by Teasdale et al.

knowledge is purely speculative. A suggestion for future research would be to

Limitations of the study

Another limitation on the usefulness of the present study is the single-

stress involved in higher education. This research helped to explain some of

Baer, R. A. (2003). Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A

Beauchemin, J., Hutchins, T. L., & Patterson, F. (2008). Mindfulness

Broderick, P. C. (2005). Mindfulness and coping with dysphoric mood:

Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present:

Broderick, P. C. (2005). Mindfulness and coping with dysphoric mood:

Campbell, R. L., Svenson, L. W., & Jarvis, G. K. (1992). Perceived level of

Perceived Stress 21.4 8.1 14.2 6.2

p<.001 p<.01 p<.05