TPC-Journal-V5-Issue1

The Professional Counselor /Volume 5, Issue 1 41 This study utilized a modified version of MBCT in individual counseling sessions to teach and process MBCT core skills of mindfulness meditation and cognitive decentering. While MBCT has mostly been utilized in group formats, there is some argument that group counseling is not always the best approach. Kuyken et al. (2008) found that 5% of an eligible sample for their MBCT study declined participation because they did not like the group aspect of the intervention. Lau and Yu (2009) suggested that offering mindfulness-based treatments in an individual format might increase participation for those who are reluctant to be involved in group settings. The purpose of this exploratory single-subject experimental study was to evaluate the effectiveness of using MBCT to help reduce stress among university nursing students. Nursing students were used because of their documented high levels of stress. The questions explored included whether using MBCT in individual sessions increases self-reported levels of mindfulness and decreases self-reported levels of stress. Method Research Design Single-subject design has a long history in psychological and counseling research (Heppner, Wampold, & Kivlighan, 2008). Barlow and Hersen’s (1984) exposition on the chronology of single-subject design reveals that psychology’s early research development was steeped in the use of this type of experiment. Lundervold and Belwood (2000) called single-subject experimental design “the best kept secret in counseling” (p. 92). This design can provide counselors with scientific methods of research that produce practical and useful clinical information that can be applied to practice settings. There are several advantages of using a single-subject experimental design. It allows the researcher to narrow causes of behavior change and determine which treatment approaches are most effective. Group designs often can obscure change in individuals, thereby not allowing flexibility in modifying treatment protocols to isolate examples of cause and effect (Barlow & Hersen, 1984). Morgan and Morgan (2003) posited single- subject design as the best option when trying to explain individual differences. Another advantage of single- subject experimental design is that because the researcher collects data using a baseline and intervention phase, the subject acts as his or her own control group, thereby increasing internal validity (Sharpley, 2007). Additionally, single-subject design can allow for scrutiny of new and innovative approaches (Chapman, Baker, Nassar-McMillan, & Gerler, 2011). Specifically, this study utilized a basic single-subject experimental AB design that allows for a maximum clinical utility . Participants Participants in this study were all senior-level students enrolled in a Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) program at a small rural Southeastern university. Four of the participants were female and one was male. Participant ages ranged from 21–30 years old (mean age 25.6 years). Three of the participants were Caucasian, one was Hispanic American and one was Native American. The sample was recruited from students enrolled in the upper division pre-licensure BSN program and fully engaged in all activities and requirements of the program, including clinical work at local hospitals in order to develop basic and advanced nursing skills. Recruitment involved presenting the study and requirements for participation to a class for senior nursing students and sending an e-mail to all junior and senior students, yielding five volunteers. Two of the participants dropped out of the study after intervention sessions two and three, respectively. (More discussion and analysis about participant attrition is presented in the results section.)