Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology A Multicourse, Multisemester Investigation of the Impact of Cognitive Reappraisal and Mindfulness Instruction on Short- and Long-Term Learning in the College Classroom Sarah R. Cavanagh, James M. Lang, Jeffrey L. Birk, Carl E. Fulwiler, and Heather L. Urry Online First Publication, December 5, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/stl0000174

CITATION Cavanagh, S. R., Lang, J. M., Birk, J. L., Fulwiler, C. E., & Urry, H. L. (2019, December 5). A Multicourse, Multisemester Investigation of the Impact of Cognitive Reappraisal and Mindfulness Instruction on Short- and Long-Term Learning in the College Classroom. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/stl0000174 Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology

A Multicourse, Multisemester Investigation of the Impact of Cognitive Reappraisal and Mindfulness Instruction on Short- and Long-Term Learning in the College Classroom

Sarah R. Cavanagh and James M. Lang Jeffrey L. Birk Assumption College Columbia University Irving Medical Center

Carl E. Fulwiler Heather L. Urry University of Massachusetts Medical School Tufts University

Emotions impact learning, in part by affecting cognitive resources like attention and working memory. Clinical literature suggests that cognitive reappraisal and mindfulness can benefit emotional experiences. However, evaluations of whether we can leverage these tools to improve student learning in the classroom are limited. We evaluated whether brief training in cognitive reappraisal and mindfulness, compared with an informational control condition, would impact same-day and semester-end learning in 226 undergraduates in art history, mathematics, and economics courses. On each of these intervention days, participants were randomly assigned to one of the three interventions. All students thus completed all three interventions over the course of the semester. At the end of the semester, students completed another assessment which measured class learning of material covered on the intervention days and a variety of control days on which there were no interventions. The interventions did not result in better same-day learning, but students performed better on the final exam items from intervention days, particularly the cognitive reappraisal day, F(2, 139) ϭ 4.495, p ϭ 2 .013, ␩p ϭ .061. Future research should examine the mechanisms by which cognitive reappraisal might influence learning.

Keywords: Learning, Emotion, Reappraisal, Mindfulness

The college classroom, like life, is permeated (D’Mello & Graesser, 2012; Immordino-Yang & by emotion. Confusion upon the presentation of a Damasio, 2007). Some of these affective states are new concept, frustration with a difﬁcult problem, likely to encourage learning (Cavanagh, 2016), the glow of pleasure as a skill is mastered—these but others, like anxiety, clearly detract from learn- are but a few of the affective states students ex- ing (Götz & Hall, 2013; Moore, McAuley, Allred, perience during their time in the classroom & Ashcraft, 2014). And of course, students are not This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. This work was generously supported by a grant received from X Sarah R. Cavanagh, Department of Psychology and the Davis Educational Foundation, established by Stanton and D’Amour Center for Teaching Excellence, Assumption Elisabeth Davis after Stanton Davis’s retirement as chairman of College; James M. Lang, Department of English and Shaw’s Supermarkets, Inc. The sponsor had no involvement in D’Amour Center for Teaching Excellence, Assumption study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, or College; X Jeffrey L. Birk, Department of Medicine, Co- decision to submit the article for publication. lumbia University Irving Medical Center; Carl E. Fulwiler, Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- Departments of Psychiatry and Medicine, Center for dressed to Sarah R. Cavanagh, Department of Psychol- Mindfulness, University of Massachusetts Medical School; ogy, D’Amour Center for Teaching Excellence, As- X Heather L. Urry, Department of Psychology, Tufts Uni- sumption College, 500 Salisbury Street, Worcester, MA versity. 01609. E-mail: [email protected]

1 2 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

solely focused on their work. Affective states re- greater levels of attention, motivation, and lated to their personal lives, other classes, and the memory consolidation, which, in turn, yield bet- buzzing smartphones in their laps can also distract ter learning (and vice versa for states like bore- them. In this multisemester, multidiscipline, random or anxiety). domized, blind-to-the-instructor, within-subjects, Focusing less on affect and more on the dis- preregistered research study, we evaluated tribution of cognitive resources, cognitive-load whether offering students tools to manage poten- theory (Chandler & Sweller, 1991) argues that tially disruptive affective states would benefit their attention and working memory are limited re- learning. sources, and thus are distributed among several competing demands during the process of learn- Emotions Impact Learning ing. These respective demands are intrinsic (pertaining to the task or skill, related to its Emotions evolved to prepare an organism for complexity and number of elements), extrane- action, to encourage approach of evolutionarily ous (pertaining to processing related to presen- beneficial situations and avoidance of evolu- tation style and/or distractions), and germane tionarily costly situations (Shiota & Kalat, (pertaining to changing knowledge structures, a 2017). Information that is surprising, anoma- requirement for learning). lous, and/or goal relevant evokes emotion and is Huk and Ludwigs (2009) point out, however, particularly important for people to attend to, that freeing up cognitive resources by reducing prioritize processing of, and store for future extraneous load does not guarantee that learners recall—that is, to learn about (Bower, 1992). As will automatically dedicate the extra resources such, emotional information is prioritized by to learning. They may well use their freed-up attentional (P. J. Lang & Davis, 2006) and resources to daydream, to text their friend, or to memory (Kensinger & Schachter, 2008) sys- study notes for an upcoming exam in another tems in the brain, suggesting that teaching prac- class. These authors propose a theoretical tices that tap into the affective domain might framework of augmented cognitive-load theory, yield benefits in learning (Immordino-Yang & which incorporates the additional layer of cog- Gotlieb, 2017). nitive and affective support that encourages the Research by Reinhard Pekrun and colleagues dedication of resources to learning. (Pekrun, Lichtenfeld, Marsh, Murayama, & Combining the control-value and augmented- Goetz. 2017) suggests that positive activating cognitive-load theories, providing students with emotions (e.g., curiosity, pleasure) enhance ac- tools to decrease their negative emotional reac- ademic motivation and achievement, whereas tivity and refocus their attention on their aca- negative deactivating emotions (e.g., boredom, demic goals may decrease the resources ab- hopelessness) interfere with learning. In his sorbed by distracting emotions like anxiety and control-value theory of achievement emotions, direct any freed-up resources to the task of Pekrun (2006) suggested that the best route to learning. If students dedicate more resources to optimizing student motivation and achievement germane demands, this should benefit learning is to facilitate their appraisals of classwork and and yield better academic outcomes.1 assignments as having high levels of both control (autonomy) and value (relevance for per- Cognitive Reappraisal and Mindfulness sonal present, personal future, or societal goals), This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Impact Emotion and that relationships between emotions and This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. achievement are mediated by changes in moti- If emotions can impact learning in both pos- vation, cognition, and self-regulation. Support- itive and negative ways, giving students some ing the importance of these appraisals for tools to regulate their emotions could poten- achievement, other important work illustrates tially benefit their learning. Emotion regulation the critical role of autonomy (Black & Deci, 2000) and highlights the relevance or utility of the work (Harackiewicz & Hulleman, 2010) in 1 Applying new skills to regulate emotions will also use resources. We estimate that the benefits will be superior to enhancing learning. In other words, maximizing the cost of applying the strategies, but we may be mistaken, control and value appraisals yield affective in which case we would observe either no effect or a states like curiosity and enjoyment, which elicit negative effect on learning. EMOTION LEARNING 3

refers to any process by which a person attempts laboratory, a focused breathing intervention to change their emotions in order to bring their benefited performance on timed mathematics experience in line with a perceived goal (Gross tasks in participants with high math anxiety & Thompson, 2007). Strategies for regulating (Brunyé et al., 2013); however, it is unclear emotion are numerous (Gross, 2015; Webb, whether these effects would generalize to actual Miles, & Sheeran, 2012), from modifying the classrooms and whether mindfulness would situation, to manipulating attentional focus, to benefit not only task completion but also learn- suppressing one’s emotional response. An eval- ing new skills. Preliminary evidence suggests uation of the clinical and affective literature that mindfulness-based activities at the start of yields two regulatory strategies with the most class can yield emotional and cognitive benefits empirical support: cognitive reappraisal (Gross (Calma-Birling & Gurung, 2017; Ramsburg & & Thompson, 2007) and mindfulness (Kabat- Youmans, 2014; Waters, Barsky, Ridd, & Al- Zinn, 1990). len, 2015; Yamada & Victor, 2012), but many of the studies to date are partially limited be- Cognitive Reappraisal cause of lack of random assignment and/or instructor awareness of the intervention (Waters One of the most effective emotion regulation et al., 2015). Studies of the effects of mindful- techniques is cognitive reappraisal (Webb et ness on learning in the classroom in which al., 2012), in which one reinterprets the mean- participants in the same class are randomly as- ing of a situation in order to alter its emotional signed and in which the instructor is not aware impact (Gross & John, 2003)—for instance, re- of the manipulation are indicated. This need for framing a job loss as an opportunity for career more extensive empirical evaluation is particu- exploration. Use of cognitive reappraisal is linked with higher levels of well-being and larly necessary because mindfulness interven- fewer symptoms of psychopathology (Gross & tions in the classroom are increasingly popular John, 2003; Preece, Becerra, Robinson, & (Felver, Celis-de Hoyos, Tezanos, & Singh, Gross, 2019). 2016)—the practice is outpacing the empirical Emotion regulation processes are highly rel- support. evant in the classroom, in which emotions are pervasive and the social norms for behavior are Synthesis and Conceptual Frameworks: typically strict. A few studies have investigated Impacting Emotion via Cognitive emotional interventions in the classroom and Reappraisal and Mindfulness May found no (Kim & Hodges, 2012) or marginal Benefit Learning (Strain & D’Mello, 2015) support for effects on learning. Neither of the studies used an active We know that emotions are ubiquitous in the control, however, and both were conducted in classroom and important for learning, and we online environments. It is not clear the extent to know that mindfulness and cognitive reap- which online learning environment research praisal are among the most effective strategies will translate to face-to-face classroom settings, to benefit emotional experiences and outcomes. and more work is clearly indicated before we However, we do not yet have extensive real- can make conclusions about the impact of emo- classroom evidence to support the idea that we tion interventions in the classroom. can implement these tools to improve student This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. learning. Simply put, we do not know whether

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualMindfulness user and is not to be disseminated broadly. exercises that are effective at improving emo- Mindfulness is a multifaceted mental state tional outcomes outside the classroom are also that blends focused awareness of moment-to- effective at improving learning outcomes inside moment experience with an attitude of accep- the classroom. tance, curiosity, and affection (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). Here, we extend the augmented-cognitive- Mindfulness-based interventions successfully load theory to examine how adaptively respond- reduce symptoms of numerous psychiatric dis- ing to emotion may allow students to direct orders and yield many beneﬁts for psychologi- more cognitive resources to the process of learn- cally healthy people (Chiesa & Serretti, 2011; ing. We propose that by providing support for Hofmann, Sawyer, Witt, & Oh, 2010). In the students to reduce their negative emotional re- 4 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

activity (through the application of mindfulness impacting emotions or establishing a greater and cognitive reappraisal), we may reduce their focus on learning) represents an important re- extraneous load and maximize learning. This search question, because should these interven- possibility is consistent with research on math tions be found effective, they could be easily anxiety, which has suggested that such anxiety implemented in real-life classrooms to better is associated with an “affective drop” in perfor- students’ educational experiences. Cognitive re- mance (Moore et al., 2014). Namely, reducing appraisal is little studied and little used in the negative affective states like boredom, frustra- classroom; knowing its benefits would thus rep- tion, and anxiety may decrease extraneous load resent untapped potential to better student ex- by reducing physiological arousal and worri- perience. Mindfulness is heavily studied and some, distracting thoughts. Our goal was not to often practiced in the classroom, but empirical eradicate negative emotions. Rather, we aimed support in higher education is equivocal; know- to help students find ways of interpreting neg- ing more about its effects may impact practice. ative emotions in the classroom in ways that have been linked to lower reactivity and to more Present Study adaptive emotional states, which would ideally 2 reduce extraneous load and benefit learning. In the current work, we evaluated whether This synthesis of control-value and cogni- giving students tools from cognitive reappraisal tive-load theories is also consistent with a re- and mindfulness at the start of class would cently proposed model of emotion regulation in benefit short-term and long-term learning of the achievement situations (Harley, Pekrun, Taxer, material that followed the interventions (com- & Gross, 2019). This model integrates the con- pared with a control condition). trol-value theory with the process model of We presented cognitive reappraisal, mindful- emotion regulation. It suggests that the class- ness, and informational control interventions room is a specific setting in which both emo- (described in detail in the Methods section) tions and goals are salient, and integrates the using a brief web application presented on tablet importance of appraisals of control and value devices (iPads) that included text, images, and within the larger family of cognitive change examples of how the regulatory strategies could strategies of emotion regulation. Within this be applied during class. We manipulated the model, the instructional interventions aimed to intervention condition on a within-subjects ba- help students make adaptive appraisals of their sis, in which each condition was deployed on 3 experiences in the classroom. The cognitive ap- different class days during the semester (see praisal intervention focused on appraisals re- Figure 1 for a full depiction of the study de- lated to value (of the process of learning, of sign). their instructor’s care for their progress, of the Presenting these interventions and control sometimes-beneficial nature of negative states condition using headphones and iPads allowed like frustration when learning something new), us to randomize participants so that a subset of and the mindfulness intervention focused on participants on each of the 3 test days received appraisals related to acceptance. each intervention or the informational control, Aside from the emotional benefit that we and meant that the instructors were blind to hoped the students would gain from the instruc- participant condition. Participants interacted tional interventions, cognitive-load theory would This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. with the web application at the start of class and also suggest that practices that focus cognitive This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. then put aside the iPads while the instructors resources on the task of learning rather than taught them a lesson. At the end of class, par- extraneous distractions should benefit subse- ticipants picked up the iPads and completed a quent learning. Beginning a college class with a brief multiple-choice quiz on the lesson. Partic- transitional activity that focuses the class on the task of learning is a commonly recommended pedagogical tool (e.g., J. M. Lang, 2016) that 2 We would like to acknowledge that these brief instruc- has, to this date, received little empirical eval- tional interventions are unlikely to be powerful enough to ameliorate negative emotions surrounding many of more uation. serious levels of distress students may be experiencing Whether small interventions at the start of because of challenges like food insecurity, trauma, and/or class can benefit student learning (either by clinically significant levels of depression or anxiety. EMOTION LEARNING 5

Figure 1. Overview of study design and measurements collected at each session.

ipants rated their moods before and after the proved end-of-semester “final exam” intervention, and then again after the lesson but performance). before the quiz. They also took a final exam at Hypothesis 3 (H3): Intervention-based the end of the semester containing questions improvements in academic performance from these days and a variety of measurement (H3a: same-day perceptions of learning; control days. H3b: same-day quiz performance, or We conducted this experiment over two dif- H3c: end-of-semester final exam perfor- ferent semesters in introductory courses in three mance) will be mediated by improve- disciplines (one science, technology, engineer- ments in mood. ing, or math, one humanities, and one social science). Hypothesis 4 (H4): Given that all three interventions engage focusing of attention Hypotheses at the start of class, all three interventions, whether aimed at regulating emotion (cog- We tested five primary hypotheses. Com- nitive reappraisal and mindfulness inter- pared with the informational control interven- ventions) or not (informational control in- tion, we anticipated the following: tervention), will boost end-of-semester “final exam” performance. Hypothesis 1 (H1): Mindfulness and cog- Hypothesis 5 (H5): nitive reappraisal interventions will result As they represent in improvements in mood (H1a: There will novel, potentially arousing activities, sim- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. be an increase in same-day positive emo- ply providing mood ratings at the start of This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. tions; H1b: There will be a decrease in class (5a) or taking a quiz at the end of same-day negative emotions). class (5b) will boost end-of-semester “final exam” performance. The latter effect Hypothesis 2 (H2): Mindfulness and would also be suggested by extensive re- cognitive reappraisal interventions will search on retrieval practice (Roediger & result in better academic performance Butler, 2011). (H2a: The interventions will result in improved same-day perceptions of learn- As both mindfulness and cognitive reap- ing; H2b: The interventions will result in praisal have been demonstrated to have benefi- improved same-day quiz performance; cial effects on emotion, we did not have a priori 2c: The interventions will result in im- predictions regarding whether mindfulness or 6 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

cognitive reappraisal would be superior with Procedure respect to their impact on the relevant outcomes. On each of 3 intervention days, participants rated their emotions, completed their assigned intervention, rated their emotions again, and Method then put the iPads aside while the instructor presented the planned lesson. At the end of All procedures, stopping decisions, measure- class, the participants picked up the iPads again, ment variables, hypotheses, and data analysis reported on their emotions and perceived learn- plans were preregistered on the Open Science ing, and then took a short multiple-choice quiz Framework before data collection commenced on the material they had just learned. We in- (https://osf.io/92vuh). cluded several additional control days to test for the effect of emotion rating at the start of class, Participants taking a quiz at the end of class, and the com- bination of the two (see Figure 1 for a full The sample consisted of all students enrolled depiction of the study design). in the specific courses taught by our recruited Participants also took a final exam at the end faculty over the Spring 2017 and Fall 2017 of the semester containing questions from these semesters at a small liberal arts Catholic college days and a variety of measurement control days. in New England: an Art History course (71 Thus, the primary dependent measures were the students across three classes), a math class in emotion ratings, the quiz scores, and the final Elementary Functions (81 students across three exam scores. classes), and an Introduction to Microeconom- Students provided data on the first day of ics course (74 students across four classes). class and on each of 7 additional class days over Across all of these courses, we thus recruited the semester, one of which was scheduled just ϭ 226 participants (124 women, average age prior to the end of the semester. The activities ϭ 19.23 years, SD 1.07). Reflecting the general associated with all sessions are described in the demographics of the school we were recruiting next section. Note that the sessions were spread from, the majority of participants were White throughout the semester. The study registration, (77%), with the next largest racial identifica- intervention randomization, and study data col- tions being Black or African American (8%) lection were all performed using an Angular and Asian or Asian American (2.2%). The pro- web app with backend services written in Java, portion of participants reporting Hispanic or hosted on Amazon Web Services. Latino heritage was 9.7%. In our preregistra- First week of class. At the start of the tion, we estimated recruiting 190 participants. semester, students established a unique identi- According to the pwr package in R, this gives us fication number designed to be nonidentifiable sensitivity to detect paired within-subjects ef- but easily remembered, learned about the study, fect sizes of d ϭ .20 or higher (Champely, and provided demographic information. 2018). Test sessions. At the start of class, students The college’s institutional review board re- received headphones and iPads, which cued viewed the protocol and approved it as exempt them to rate their current mood as a preinter- from review, as the procedures were deemed

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. vention measurement. Next, they completed the typical educational practices. Indeed, several

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. tasks associated with one of three conditions instructors on campus were already implement- (order randomized over test sessions, with re- ing mindfulness exercises in their classes and searchers and instructor blind to condition): quizzes following a lesson, practices that have been demonstrated to improve learning (e.g., 1. a cognitive reappraisal condition, in which Roediger & Butler, 2011). Because the instruc- students were guided through a training tors embraced the interventions and the associ- aimed at encouraging helpful interpreta- ated quizzes on the material as part of the edu- tions of the learning experience and their cational practices within their classes, we did emotional response; not offer incentives to the students for their 2. a mindfulness condition, in which students participation. were guided through a training aimed at EMOTION LEARNING 7

promoting a state of focus, acceptance, and length, and then asked students to imagine lower emotional reactivity; and three emotional scenarios that could arise in 3. an informational (control) condition, in which the lesson to follow and to commit to using students were guided through an SAT-style reappraisal in response. For example, the fol- reading comprehension passage—the de- lowing is the leading scenario with one of the mands of this exercise matched the visual three completion prompts for the frustration and motor aspects of the other two condi- scenario: tions but without engaging mindfulness or cognitive reappraisal. IF I find myself becoming irritated and frustrated with my progress, my professor, or my peers, or find myself feeling lost and confused, THEN I will instead think The full text of all three interventions (one that the best rewards in learning occur by working course’s informational control as an example) is through initial confusion. provided in Appendix. These interventions were guided instructions on how to apply cognitive Mindfulness intervention. The mindful- reappraisal and mindfulness during the class to ness intervention mirrored that of the cogni- come rather than emotional induction followed tive reappraisal intervention, in that it began by guided practice. with normalizing emotions in the college and Cognitive reappraisal intervention. The classroom experience, then defined mindful- cognitive reappraisal intervention consisted of a ness, then described some research demon- series of pictures overlaid by explanatory text, strating its effectiveness, and then moved into followed by three opportunities to commit to/ the scenarios with the three options, which practice using reappraisal during the lesson to represented mindful ways of approaching follow. The intervention began with a discus- emotional experience rather than techniques sion of how the college experience is full of for reappraisal. Participants were asked to emotions, both positive and negative, and that commit to one mindful approach per scenario. these are experiences that the participants share For example, the following is the leading with their peers. It then described what cogni- scenario with one of the three completion tive reappraisal was, gave an example of it, and prompts for the anxiety scenario: shared that research has demonstrated its effectiveness in regulating emotion. Following all of IF I find myself becoming nervous about my performance in answering questions in class or on quizzes or this psychoeducational material, we presented tests, or about my grade in the class, THEN I will to students three scenarios that might arise dur- instead let this nervousness be, accepting it as it is, not ing the lesson to follow—that they may become trying to change it or make it go away. bored with the material, that they may start Informational control. Each of the three feeling anxious, and that they may become frustrated. classes had a different informational control Each of these scenarios (boredom, anxiety, task, which used the same structure as the emo- frustration) were accompanied by three (equally tional interventions (images and explanatory representative of reappraisal) possibilities for text followed by three multiple choice options) ways that the student could reframe or rethink but which presented information sourced the emotion or the situation were it to arise (nine from example SAT and GRE reading compre- total reappraisals). These were presented in an hension texts. In art history, students were This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. if–then structure, similar to implementation in- presented with information about watercolor This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualtentions user and is not to be disseminated broadly. (e.g., “IF I find myself losing interest and painter Dong Kingman. In economics, stu- focus, becoming tempted to think about or do dents read information about the role of ethics things unrelated to class, THEN I will instead in economics. In math, students read informa- think about . . .”). Implementation intentions tion about the changing proportions of philos- make automatic the link between goal-relevant ophy majors over time. Each of the passages situations and one’s preferred goal-directed re- was selected from one of three possibilities sponse (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006). In sum- per class (nine total passages), which were to mary, the intervention raised the issue of emo- be as closely matched as possible on variables tions during the college experience, described like reading complexity, interest level, and cognitive reappraisal and its effectiveness at number of multiple-choice questions correct, 8 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

based on ratings by pilot participants on Am- PrePost measurement control sessions. On each azon Mechanical Turk. occasion, they provided ratings of how they felt Control sessions. Participants completed a using 10 items adapted from previous work by number of additional control sessions so that we Tamir, John, Srivastava, and Gross (2007). We could systematically evaluate the effect of as- used items that we thought would be most rel- pects of the test sessions that were unrelated to evant in the classroom. Each item was com- the actual content of the interventions. posed of a set of three emotion adjectives; par- Measurement control sessions. The mea- ticipants rated how they felt based on each set as surement control sessions paralleled the test ses- a whole on a scale from 0 (not at all)to6(very sions, with the exception that students did not much), with a midpoint anchor at 3 (moder- complete an intervention; instead, they received ately). Items were presented in alphabetical or- a tablet and (a) provided prelesson mood ratings der of the first word in each set. The negative (PreOnly) plus received their instructor’s les- emotions were anxious, worried, fearful; bored, son, (b) received their instructor’s lesson and indifferent, uninterested; confused, puzzled, took a quiz afterward (PostOnly), or (c) pro- lost; frustrated, exasperated, impatient; and vided mood ratings before and after their in- judged, scrutinized, evaluated. The positive structor’s lesson, provided ratings of percep- emotions were active, alert, keyed up; affection- tions of learning, and took a quiz afterward (PrePost). ate, loving, connected to others; curious, inter- No-researcher sessions. On these 3 days, ested, engrossed; happy, pleased, contented; students did not use a research tablet or provide and self-confident, capable, worthwhile.We any data and researchers were not present. In- calculated two subscale scores by computing an structors simply delivered their planned lesson average, one for the positive emotions (five and provided us with three items to be included items) and one for the negative emotions (five in the research “final exam” (None1, None2, items), for each of the 12 measurement occa- None3). sions. Final exam session. To assess long-term Perceptions of learning (subjective). On retention of material, near the end of the semes- each of the days that contained a quiz and mood ter, students completed a brief “final exam,” ratings after the lesson (i.e., the three test ses- which contained material from the test, mea- sions and PrePost), participants also rated the surement control, and no-researcher sessions. following items on a 5-point scale with anchors Test sessions, measurement control sessions, at each point (minimal, below average, average, and no-researcher sessions were yoked together above average, and substantial): degree of in- and occurred over approximately a week and a terest in the lesson, degree of challenge pre- half toward the beginning, middle, and end of sented by the lesson, extent of learning, and the semester, respectively. Order of control ses- extent of mastery of the perceived goal of the sions was pseudorandomized across the three lesson. disciplines. For instance, in one section, in Sep- Assessments of same-day learning (objective). tember, students completed one test session, A quiz was administered on five measurement PrePost, and None1; in mid-October, they com- occasions (three test sessions, two measurement pleted one test session, PostOnly, and None2; control sessions [PostOnly, PrePost]). Each

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. and in late November, they completed the final quiz contained five multiple-choice items with This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualtest user and is not to be disseminated session, broadly. PreOnly, and None3. The “final four response options (one correct answer and exam” was held either on the last day or sec- three incorrect distractors) and was provided by ondto- last day of the semester, according to the instructors. professor preference. Assessment of long-term learning (objective). The “final exam” was administered once at the Measures end of the semester. It contained 27 items— Mood ratings. Participants provided mood three items from each of nine class days (three ratings on 12 measurement occasions: three test sessions, three measurement control ses- times during each of three test sessions, and sions, and three no-researcher sessions). All once during the PreOnly and twice during the items were multiple choice with four response EMOTION LEARNING 9

options, and the exam was provided by the the five-item quiz and three-item final exam instructors. scores, for which the items tapped different as- Perceptions of the course and interven- pects of the day’s lesson and therefore should not tions (subjective). After the “final exam” on be expected to load equally on a higher order the last day of the study, students and professors factor. Second, the items were dichotomous (1 ϭ both completed some evaluative questions correct, 0 ϭ incorrect), in which case Gadermann, about the course and the interventions (see Ta- Guhn, and Zumbo (2012) recommended calculat- ble 1, which reports students’ and professors’ ing reliability using polychoric (as opposed to perceptions of the course and interventions). Pearson) correlation matrices to account for trun- Demographics. On the first study day, stu- cated variance. dents provided demographic information and We computed the reliability indices using the ratings of their feelings about the course, in- psych library (Revelle, 2018) in R (R Core Team, cluding age, gender identity, race, ethnicity, 2018) for each of the three classes, two semesters, year in school, major, current grade point aver- and sessions. There were five sessions for quiz age, reason for taking the course, and the extent scores (ID1: Intervention Day 1, ID2: Intervention to which they considered themselves to be a Day 2, ID3: Intervention Day 3, PostOnly, and strong student in this subject, were excited for PrePost) and nine sessions for final exam scores the course, and intended to work hard. (the five sessions noted previously plus PreOnly, Reliability of Test Score Measures None1, None2, and None3). For the quiz scores, the coefficient omega total ranged from 0.33 to Regarding the reliability of the quiz and final 1(Mdn ϭ 0.86) for the quiz scores and from 0 exam scores, we computed the total omega coef- to1(Mdn ϭ 0.64) for the final exam scores. ficient using polychoric correlation matrices. We Thus, reliability varied a great deal between used this approach because Cronbach’s alpha as- semesters, classes, and sessions. Median values sumes tau equivalence, such that the items in a for coefficient omega total suggested that the scale each contribute equally to the scale total five-item quiz scores were at least moderately (McNeish, 2018), which is likely not the case for reliable. Unsurprisingly, the three-item final

Table 1 Student and Professor Self-Reported Perceptions of Study

MSDRange Student ratings Study was interesting 2.23 1.46 0–5 Study detracted from learning 1.15 1.37 0–5 Study helped learning 1.62 1.35 0–5 Study was a negative experience .91 1.26 0–5 Cognitive reappraisal was helpful 1.56 1.34 0–5 Mindfulness was helpful 1.74 1.35 0–5 Quiz was helpful 2.60 1.49 0–5 iPads helped transition to class 1.60 1.39 0–5 Reminder of negative emotions was unhelpful 1.28 1.35 0–5 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Professor ratings

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Students more interested than usual 1.00 1.00 0–2 Study detracted from learning .67 .58 0–1 Study was a refreshing change of pace 1.67 1.53 0–3 Students seemed to like the study 2.33 .57 2–3 Students made positive comments about study 1.33 1.15 0–2 Students didn’t seem to care for study 1.33 1.15 0–2 Students made negative comments about study .00 .00 0–0 Students seemed more focused than usual 1.67 .58 1–2 Students seemed more emotional than usual .00 .00 0–0 Note. All student ratings were on a 6-point scale from not at all (0) to extremely (5). All professor ratings were on a 7-point scale from not at all (0) to extremely (6). As depicted, most professor ratings for most variables were centered around 2, which corresponded to slightly on the rating scale. 10 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

exam scores were less reliable than the five-item positive and negative mood ratings as the depen- quiz scores. However, overall, although reliabil- dent variables. This analysis included two within- ity would ideally be higher, the pattern herein subjects factors—Condition (cognitive reap- suggested that the quiz and final exam scores praisal, informational, mindfulness) and Time were tenable for use as dependent variables. We (preintervention, postintervention, postlesson)— have provided all omega total and traditional and two between-subjects factors—Course (art Cronbach’s alpha coefficients using polychoric history, economics, mathematics) and Semester correlations (see Table 2) and Pearson correla- (Spring 2017, Fall 2017). Of primary interest, we tions (see Table 3). tested H1a and H1b with two a priori contrasts each. Each contrast compared postintervention (or Results postlesson) mood with preintervention mood to determine whether change over time was bigger in Data Preparation the cognitive reappraisal and mindfulness conditions than in the informational condition. We in- All analyses were performed using SPSS. We ferred full support for H1a or H1b if one or both inspected the distribution of all measured vari- contrasts were different from zero in the expected ables and found them suited to the proposed direction. analyses that assume a normal distribution. For positive mood, cognitive reappraisal and Prior to calculating scores across mood and mindfulness did not impact mood differentially perceptions of learning rating items, we examined from the information control condition as re- whether their internal consistency was acceptable flected by mood measured preintervention and (judged by a Cronbach’s ␣ Ն.70). The mood postintervention, F(1, 139) ϭ .066, p ϭ .798, 2 ratings all met these criteria. However, the “per- ␩p Ͻ .001, or preintervention compared with 2 ceptions of learning” variable fell below this postlesson, F(1, 139) ϭ 1.402, p ϭ .238, ␩p ϭ threshold. Examining the individual items, the .010. For negative mood, cognitive reappraisal item relating to the perceived challenge of the and mindfulness did not impact mood differen- material seemed to be driving these lower consis- tially from the information control condition as tencies. Upon consideration, it seems reasonable reflected by mood measured before and after the 2 that the degree to which one found material diffi- intervention, F(1, 139) ϭ .043, p ϭ .837, ␩p Ͻ cult or stimulating would be qualitatively different .001, or preintervention compared with postles- 2 from the other items, which all related to the son, F(1, 139) ϭ 1.609, p ϭ .207, ␩p ϭ .011 degree of understanding, learning, or mastery of (see Figures 2 and 3). the material. We decided to formulate the over- On the overall GLM, we did observe a non- all perceptions of learning score leaving out the anticipated main effect of time, F(4, 136) ϭ challenge item, which raised the internal con- 2 22.149, p Ͻ .0001, ␩p ϭ .394. As this finding sistency of the scale to acceptable levels (Cron- did not relate to the hypothesis, we did not ␣ϭ bach’s .723). follow it further. For Hypotheses 2 (2a, 2b, and 2c), 4 (4a and Hypothesis 2. To test whether mindfulness 4b), and 5 (5a and 5b), we set alpha at .05 for and cognitive reappraisal interventions would re- determining whether the single a priori contrast of sult in better academic performance as measured interest is surprising if the null hypothesis is true. by same-day perceptions in learning (2a), same- This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. For H1a and H1b and H3a, H3b, and H3c, we day quiz performance (2b), and end-of-semester This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualused user and is not to be disseminated broadly. a Bonferroni correction to adjust the alpha to ϭ “final exam” performance (2c), we computed re- .05/k, where k 2 a priori contrasts each for H1a peated measures GLM with one factor, condition and H1b, and k ϭ 8 effects each for H3a, H3b, and (cognitive reappraisal, informational, mindful- H3c. ness), and the measures of learning as the depen- Hypothesis Testing dent variables. These analyses each included one a priori contrast. This contrast compared the cogni- Hypothesis 1. To test the hypothesis that tive reappraisal (coded 1) and mindfulness (coded mindfulness and reappraisal interventions would re- 1) interventions with the informational (coded sult in improvements in mood, we computed a Ϫ2) intervention. A contrast greater than zero mixed-model general linear model (GLM) with would indicate full support for the contrast. EMOTION LEARNING 11

Table 2 Internal Consistency Reliability for the Quiz and Final Exam Scores in Each Session, Class, and Semester Calculated With Polychoric Correlation Matrices

Quizzes Final exam Day and class Semester Alpha Omega total n Alpha Omega total n Post only Art Fall .44 .72 26 Ϫ.11 .00 27 Art Spring .50 .84 35 Ϫ.22 .45 30 Economics Fall .45 .65 40 .41 .62 38 Economics Spring .69 .90 39 .59 .80 35 Math Fall .86 .95 46 .41 .58 42 Math Spring .47 .91 24 .17 .37 23 PrePost Art Fall .32 .77 24 .34 .64 27 Art Spring .58 .75 32 .60 .66 30 Economics Fall .46 .79 34 Ϫ.53 .00 38 Economics Spring .69 .92 37 .36 .60 35 Math Fall .76 .96 46 .34 .54 42 Math Spring .87 1.00 22 .58 .68 23 ID1 Art Fall Ϫ.78 .74 27 Ϫ.16 .16 27 Art Spring .68 .91 39 .06 .74 30 Economics Fall .77 .88 36 .74 .76 38 Economics Spring .68 .86 33 NA NA NA Math Fall .56 .89 28 .09 .41 42 Math Spring .72 .87 23 .63 .64 23 ID2 Art Fall .25 .75 28 .59 .79 27 Art Spring .27 .77 32 .52 .85 30 Economics Fall .71 .89 36 .43 .50 38 Economics Spring .71 .79 37 .73 .74 35 Math Fall .60 .89 45 Ϫ.43 .08 42 Math Spring .30 .78 18 .49 .88 23 ID3 Art Fall .23 .33 22 Ϫ.02 .10 27 Art Spring .75 .85 31 .47 .71 30 Economics Fall .65 .89 33 .34 .56 38 Economics Spring .71 .85 35 .49 .65 35 Math Fall .62 .89 42 NA NA NA Math Spring .86 .93 21 .84 .87 23 Pre only Art Fall — — — .58 1.00 27 Art Spring — — — Ϫ.31 .00 30 Economics Fall — — — .62 .70 38 Economics Spring — — — Ϫ.30 .05 35 Math Fall — — — .61 .91 42

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Math Spring — — — .58 .64 23

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual userNone1 and is not to be disseminated broadly. Art Fall — — — Ϫ.47 .00 27 Art Spring — — — .55 .77 30 Economics Fall — — — .30 .71 38 Economics Spring — — — .74 .77 35 Math Fall — — — .58 .60 42 Math Spring — — — .31 .44 23 None2 Art Fall — — — .52 .80 27 Art Spring — — — Ϫ.55 .01 30 (table continues) 12 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

Table 2 (continued) Quizzes Final exam Day and class Semester Alpha Omega total n Alpha Omega total n Economics Fall — — — .15 .53 38 Economics Spring — — — .57 .74 35 Math Fall — — — .53 .54 42 Math Spring — — — .24 .96 23 None3 Art Fall — — — .29 .63 27 Art Spring — — — .62 .68 30 Economics Fall — — — .34 .36 38 Economics Spring — — — .71 .72 35 Math Fall — — — .74 .84 42 Math Spring — — — .46 .80 23 Note. There were no quizzes administered in the Pre only, None1, None2, or None3 sessions; thus, no reliability values are reported. Otherwise, “NA” is noted when the coefﬁcient could not be computed. Post Only refers to the measurement control day where the only study procedure was taking a quiz at the end of class. PrePost refers to measurement control day in which participants rated their moods before class and took a quiz at the end of class but did not complete an intervention. ID1, ID2, ID3 refer to the three randomized intervention days. Pre Only refers to the measurement control day where the only study procedure was rating moods at the start of class. None1, None2, None3 refer to the measurement control days in which there were no study procedures but for which the instructors provided ﬁnal exam questions.

Hypothesis 2a. For this test, perceptions of ter “final exam” performance, we computed a learning was the dependent variable. These con- repeated measures GLM with one factor of contrasts did not provide support for this hypothe- dition, which has nine levels (cognitive reap- ϭ ϭ ␩2 Ͻ sis, F(1, 139) .047, p .828, p .0001. praisal, informational, mindfulness, PreOnly, Hypothesis 2b. For this test, quiz scores PostOnly, PrePost, None1, None2, and None3) were the dependent variable. These contrasts with final exam scores for each day as the did not provide support for this hypothesis, F(1, dependent variable. The analysis included four ϭ ϭ ␩2 ϭ 134) .106, p .745, p .001. a priori contrasts that test H4. Each contrast Hypothesis 2c. For this test, final exam compared the intervention days cognitive reap- subscores were the dependent variable. These praisal (1), mindfulness (1), informational (1), analyses did not provide support for this hy- with one of the measurement control days (Pre- F ϭ p ϭ ␩2 ϭ pothesis, (1, 140) 1.734, .190, p Only, PostOnly, or PrePost, each coded Ϫ3) or .012. However, inspection of the marginal to the average of the no-researcher days means led us to examine the main effect of (None1, None2, None3, each coded Ϫ1). We condition, which was significant, F(2, 139) ϭ 2 inferred full support for the hypothesis when 4.495, p ϭ .013, ␩p ϭ .061. Examination of the pairwise comparisons revealed that this pattern any of the contrasts were greater than zero. of results was related to cognitive reappraisal Custom hypothesis tests revealed that the in- leading to better final exam performance than tervention days were superior to the days that either mindfulness (p ϭ .015) or informational the researchers did not come into the classroom This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. control (p ϭ .012). Mindfulness and informa- at all (i.e., Intervention compared with None), This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. ϭ Ͻ ␩2 ϭ tional control did not differ from each other in F(1, 140) 12.756, p .0001, p .084. The final exam performance (p ϭ .978). Figure 4 intervention days were not significantly supe- provides a depiction of these results. rior to PreOnly (p ϭ .878) or PostOnly (p ϭ Hypothesis 3. Given that the GLM analy- .255). Interestingly, PrePost led to better final ses for H1 revealed no evidence of improve- exam scores than the interventions considered ments in mood, we did not pursue the hypoth- together, F(1, 140) ϭ 17.008, p Ͻ .0001, 2 esis that changes in academic performance ␩p ϭ .108 (although as noted in the next would be mediated by changes in mood further. section, PrePost did not lead to final exam Hypothesis 4. To test the hypothesis that all scores that were better than cognitive reap- three interventions would boost end-of-semes- praisal; see Figure 5). EMOTION LEARNING 13

Table 3 Internal Consistency Reliability for the Quiz and Final Exam Scores in Each Session, Class, and Semester Calculated With Pearson Correlation Matrices

Quizzes Final exam Semester Alpha Omega total n Alpha Omega total n Post only Art Fall .33 .54 26 Ϫ.03 .17 27 Art Spring .34 .56 35 Ϫ.11 .22 30 Economics Fall .31 .44 40 .29 .44 38 Economics Spring .50 .68 39 .44 .59 35 Math Fall .69 .80 46 .07 .25 42 Math Spring .30 .69 24 .10 .22 23 PrePost Art Fall .11 .50 24 Ϫ.14 .09 27 Art Spring .58 .75 32 .23 .36 30 Economics Fall .29 .53 34 Ϫ.28 .00 38 Economics Spring .53 .71 37 .12 .34 35 Math Fall .62 .80 46 .19 .31 42 Math Spring .87 1.00 22 .26 .48 23 ID1 Art Fall Ϫ.37 .58 27 Ϫ.09 .09 27 Art Spring .53 .70 39 .04 .48 30 Economics Fall .57 .74 36 .56 .58 38 Economics Spring .68 .86 33 NA NA NA Math Fall .40 .65 28 Ϫ.32 .00 42 Math Spring .72 .87 23 .40 .41 23 ID2 Art Fall .16 .43 28 .35 .61 27 Art Spring .14 .48 32 .34 .63 30 Economics Fall .71 .89 36 .30 .35 38 Economics Spring .54 .64 37 .56 .57 35 Math Fall .43 .61 45 Ϫ.17 .17 42 Math Spring .30 .78 18 .36 .64 23 ID3 Art Fall .23 .33 22 Ϫ.30 .00 27 Art Spring .75 .85 31 .30 .57 30 Economics Fall .33 .64 33 .22 .35 38 Economics Spring .51 .64 35 .33 .44 35 Math Fall .43 .64 42 NA NA NA Math Spring .74 .85 21 .65 .69 23 Pre only Art Fall — — — .44 .75 27 Art Spring — — — Ϫ.15 .00 30 Economics Fall — — — .38 .43 38 Economics Spring — — — Ϫ.21 .02 35 Math Fall — — — .45 .64 42 Math Spring — — — .39 .44 23 None1 Art Fall — — — Ϫ.21 .00 27 Art Spring — — — .45 .49 30 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Economics Fall — — — .21 .44 38 This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and isEconomics not to be disseminated broadly. Spring — — — .55 .59 35 Math Fall — — — .37 .38 42 Math Spring — — — .20 .28 23 None2 Art Fall — — — .43 .63 27 Art Spring — — — Ϫ.30 .00 30 Economics Fall — — — .14 .42 38 Economics Spring — — — .41 .54 35 Math Fall — — — .33 .34 42 Math Spring — — — .19 .65 23 (table continues) 14 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

Table 3 (continued) Quizzes Final exam Semester Alpha Omega total n Alpha Omega total n None3 Art Fall — — — .18 .37 27 Art Spring — — — .48 .55 30 Economics Fall — — — .23 .25 38 Economics Spring — — — .54 .55 35 Math Fall — — — .54 .63 42 Math Spring — — — .11 .41 23 Note. There were no quizzes administered in the Pre only, None1, None2, or None3 sessions; thus, no reliability values are reported. Otherwise, “NA” is noted when the coefﬁcient could not be computed.

Hypothesis 5. To test the hypothesis that inferred full support for Hypothesis 5 when the simply providing mood ratings at the start of corresponding contrast, one for each, was class (H5a) or taking a quiz at the end (H5b) greater than zero. would boost end-of-semester “final exam” per- Providing mood ratings at the start of class formance, the GLM analysis Identified in H4 did boost performance above the days the re- included two additional contrasts that test searchers did not come into class, F(1, 140) ϭ 2 whether (a) providing mood ratings at the start 6.023, p ϭ .015, ␩p ϭ .041, but taking a quiz at of class (PreOnly coded 3) or (b) taking a quiz the end did not reach significance (p ϭ .107). at the end of class (PostOnly coded 3) boosted Interestingly, pairwise comparisons revealed performance relative to no-researcher days that the PrePost condition yielded better final (None1, None2, None3, each coded Ϫ1). We exam performance than any of the conditions

4 Pre Intervention Post Intervention 3 Post Lesson

Positive Affect Positive 2

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. 1 This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 0 CR IN MI Intervention

Figure 2. Mean scores for negative (see Figure 2) and positive (see Figure 3) affect, by time of data collection (preintervention, postintervention, and postlesson), depicted separately by intervention condition. Cognitive reappraisal (CR) and mindfulness (MI) did not impact mood differentially from the information control (IN) condition. See the online article for the color version of this ﬁgure. EMOTION LEARNING 15

4 Pre Intervention 3 Post Intervention Post Lesson 2 Negative Affect Affect Negative

0 CR IN MI Intervention

Figure 3. Mean scores for negative (see Figure 2) and positive (see Figure 3) affect, by time of data collection (preintervention, postintervention, and postlesson), depicted separately by intervention condition. Cognitive reappraisal (CR) and mindfulness (MI) did not impact mood differentially from the information control (IN) condition. See the online article for the color version of this ﬁgure.

except cognitive reappraisal, from which it was pictures or video clips) and then asks partici- statistically indistinguishable (mean difference pants to regulate the emotion via reappraisal. In .099, p ϭ .310). contrast, the students in this study entered class in a variety of emotional states and had not yet Discussion begun the class and encountered learning- relevant emotions. Second, both of the emotion In this rigorously controlled design across interventions began by acknowledging that the multiple courses and semesters, we found evi- college experience can be a heady time full of dence that brief focusing activities at the start of anxieties and frustrations, before moving on to class, and cognitive reappraisal in particular, suggest strategies for dealing with these emo- were effective in increasing longer term learn- tions. The three implementation intentions that ing. concluded both the reappraisal and mindfulness Cognitive Reappraisal and Mindfulness Did interventions were situated in the future (“IF I become anxious during class, THEN I will...”)

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Not Significantly Impact Emotions rather than in the present. Thus, the interven- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. In contrast to our hypothesis, when compared tions themselves may have introduced a mixed with the informational control condition, neither emotional state and done little to regulate in- of the strategies the researchers offered students the-moment emotions. As we noted in the in- to help regulate their emotions significantly im- troduction, the intervention instructions focused pacted their self-reported emotions before and at least as much on acceptance of negative emo- after the interventions. Our hypothesis may tions as it did regulation of these emotions, and have been incorrect for several different rea- so rather than reducing negative emotions, the sons. First, most work on reappraisal, in partic- instructions may have helped students focus on ular, first introduces an emotional state (through learning despite the presence of negative affec- the use of emotionally evocative stimuli, like tive states. Of course, it could also be that the 16 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

Figure 4. Final exam subscores separately by intervention condition. Cognitive reappraisal (CR) led to significantly higher scores than either informational control (IN) or mindfulness (MI). Asterisk indicates statistical significance p Ͻ .05. See the online article for the color version of this figure.

interventions were ineffective and did not suc- phones and being reminded of the importance of cessfully convey meaningful information to their academic goals may have assisted their participants about how to regulate their emo- ability to learn the material that followed in a tions. deeper way. Another possibility is that the disruption of or- Focusing Activities at the Start of Class dinary classroom activities could have yielded a Increased Long-Term Learning state of greater arousal, which, in some circum- stances, facilitates memory consolidation (Mather All three interventions, whether they provided tools from cognitive reappraisal or mind- & Sutherland, 2011). The researcher visits were fulness or simply presented information rele- marked by new social presences, the use of tech- vant to the domain the class was studying, nology, and the unpredictable nature of which yielded better performance on the final exam activities would be run that day. Any of these questions compared with days that the research- attributes of the learning study could have resulted ers did not come into the class. As the interven- in slightly greater physiological arousal, which, in This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. tions were multidimensional, it is impossible to turn, could have benefited long-term memory con- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. ascertain the precise mechanisms behind the solidation. beneficial effect of the intervention days. How- It is also possible that the context of partici- ever, several candidate mechanisms should be pating in a research study aimed at facilitating considered. learning served as a reminder of learning goals. First, settling into class mode and entering a Being prompted by goal reminders can fuel state of focus may have set the stage for better motivation (Prestwich, Perugini, & Hurling, learning. Students enter the classroom from 2010), and so the study days could have resulted their busy lives, and their heads may be full of in greater attentiveness during the lesson. Con- the stressful exam they just finished or a recent sistent with this interpretation, the one class- fight with their dating partner. Putting on head- room day that did not result in better learning EMOTION LEARNING 17

3 *

2.5

1.5

1 End-of-Semester Performance End-of-Semester

0.5

0 CR IN MI None1 None2 None3 Intervention

Figure 5. Final exam subscores separately by intervention condition compared with days the researchers did not visit the classroom at all. Collectively, students had better scores on the material from the intervention days compared with the no-researcher days (None1 – None3), even despite the higher scores for None3, which, for all students, represented some of the most recently learned material. CR ϭ Cognitive reappraisal; MI ϭ mindfulness; IN ϭ information control. See the online article for the color version of this ﬁgure.

than the no-researcher days was the day that the Cognitive Reappraisal Increased researchers only showed up at the end of the Long-Term Learning class to administer the quiz. The goal reminders could have also impacted postclass behavior, Learning how to mentally reframe boredom, perhaps in terms of students being more likely frustration, and anxiety appeared to particularly to review their notes after class or study the beneﬁt long-term retention of newly learned material in the evening that followed. Because material. Interestingly and unexpectedly, reap- the instructors knew they would have less time praisal had this effect without having a differ- than usual to accomplish the day’s learning ential effect on student emotions compared with goals on the study days, they may also have the mindfulness or informational control inter- planned their lessons more carefully. ventions. Thus, cognitive reappraisal may have Finally, all days except the quiz-only day also been effective at increasing learning, but not for involved a mood rating at the start of class, and the reason we hypothesized. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. it is possible that reﬂecting on one’s emotional The proffered reappraisals had much in com- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. state prepared students well for learning. Past mon with attributional retraining and other “tar- research has demonstrated that mentally label- geted interventions” aimed at increasing student ing emotional experiences can lessen their im- effort and motivation (Dweck, 2006; Harackie- pact (Lieberman et al., 2007). wicz & Priniski, 2018; Hulleman & Barron, Future research should evaluate these possi- 2015), and may have operated by a similar bilities by manipulating or measuring some of mechanism. These interventions tend not to tar- these possible mechanisms, for instance, by in- get student emotions but rather the attributions cluding measurements of physiological arousal or interpretations students make for their suc- or collecting data on self-reported intentions to cesses and failures. The intervention, although study after class. intended to impact student emotions, nonethe- 18 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

less asked students to reappraise their instruc- term (same day) memory. This result was un- tor’s care for their learning, their frustration as expected, as we hypothesized that we would an indicator of the process of learning new observe effects on both initial learning and then skills, and their anxiety as a sign of their prior- the degree to which the information would be itization of their own learning. These shifts in successfully retrieved over a longer period of appraisal may have served to put students in this time. Instead, participants appeared to learn the mind-set (Dweck, 2006) of focusing on their day’s lesson equally well initially, but then suc- own efforts toward learning. cessfully remembered the material from the intervention days, and particularly cognitive reap- Mindfulness Did Not Impact Learning praisal, best in the long-term assessment. Thus, the effect may have less to do with the compre- This study did not replicate previous research hension of the material and more to do with (e.g., Bellinger, DeCaro, & Ralston, 2015; Bru- longer term memory. Supporting this interpreta- nyé et al., 2013; Calma-Birling & Gurung, tion, the interventions also did not result in signif- 2017) indicating that mindfulness has at least icantly different perceptions of learning—at the some beneficial effects on learning in college end of the lessons, students reported understand- students. There may be several possible reasons ing the material to the same degree across the for this lack of replication. It may be that prac- interventions. As noted previously, this superior ticing mindfulness in the college classroom longer term memory may be explained by either does not yield benefits in learning, as was the better memory consolidation or motivated prac- conclusion of one recent large, well-controlled tices like better note-taking or postclass studying study of executive function and critical thinking behavior. (Noone & Hogan, 2018). However, we would hesitate to overgeneralize from the current find- Limitations of the Research Design ings. First, and most critically, while the researchers described mindfulness and gave stu- The study design had several limitations. First, dents several examples of how they might apply we wanted an objective assessment of learning mindfulness during the lesson that followed, that was similar across the very different courses, unlike previous work, they did not explicitly and so the quizzes and the final exam were all lead students in focusing on their present expe- multiple-choice questions. Multiple-choice ques- rience, engaging in deep breathing, relaxing tions have limitations as assessments of knowl- their muscles, or approaching their experience edge (Roediger & Marsh, 2005), but more impor- with curiosity and affection. It would be more tantly, none of the participating instructors accurate to say that the intervention was a mind- typically used multiple choice in their classes. fulness instruction rather than a guided practice, Thus, we were evaluating students using an as- the latter of which is what has been found to sessment method that was unfamiliar to them in have some beneficial effects on learning (e.g., that classroom setting and likely not ideal assess- Calma-Birling & Gurung, 2017). It may well be ments of learning in these contexts. that it is more straightforward to reinterpret or Second, the interventions had several compo- reappraise one’s emotions (as in the reappraisal nents, and thus it is difficult to know which were condition) than to independently engage in the driving the observed effects. Both the reappraisal multifaceted response that mindfulness requires and mindfulness interventions presented similar This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. with no guided practice. It may also be that for information normalizing the emotional aspects of This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. students to benefit from mindfulness, they the college experience, gave some information would need to engage in more regular practice about the nature of the two tools, and then pro- in and out of the classroom before beneficial vided participants with nine examples (three each effects could be observed. for anxiety, boredom, and frustration) of how they could implement these strategies. We also asked Interventions Did Not Affect Same-Day participants to endorse three of these strategies in Learning a format that mimicked implementation intentions. We do not know if, for example, cognitive All of the significant findings concerned lon- reappraisal’s beneficial effects on long-term learn- ger term (end of semester) rather than short- ing were related to one, some, or all of these EMOTION LEARNING 19

components. The intention was to provide an more serious challenges like food insecurity (Gol- early, important test of whether such interventions drick-Rab, 2016), trauma, and clinical levels of could be effective, and then follow it up with depression and anxiety. It is unlikely that the in- future work to better tease out mechanisms. structional interventions would effectively address Third, as the data were collected in actual emotions relevant to these challenges. classes over a semester, conditions were not ideal. In analyses that included only participants Strengths of the Design and Future with complete data, we lost one third of the Research sample. Participants were absent or showed up late, and we had to shuffle some planned data The study design had several compelling collection days because of snowstorms and the strengths, including the randomized, controlled, Amazon server collapsing. This limitation was within-subjects design; the real-world data col- unavoidable, as we wished to test real-world lection environment; the cross-disciplinary and classroom learning. It does, however, raise the multisemester structure; the inclusion of multi- possibility that the beneficial effect of reap- ple control days; and the use of an active control praisal that we observed may only be applicable condition. to students with good attendance—which could There are a number of promising directions mean that the intervention would fail to reach for future research. As discussed, future re- the students who might need it the most. Future search should evaluate the mechanisms by research testing the applicability of this inter- which cognitive reappraisal may impact long- vention to all types of students is warranted. term learning. Second, emotion-sensitive intel- Fourth, although we hoped that participants ligent tutoring systems adjust the pace of learn- would enjoy the study and that interacting with ing and offer supports based on students’ the iPads in class would be a novel, fun expe- affective states (Malekzadeh, Mustafa, & Lah- rience, the self-reports of the participants and sasna, 2015), and the field of affective comput- participating instructors somewhat contradicted ing and online learning environments has much this view. Although the average ratings for the to offer face-to-face classrooms (Graesser & study were not alarming—participants reporting D’Mello, 2012). Future research should explore middling ratings for both enjoyment of, and frustration with, the study—we did not see ev- the extent to which research in these domains idence that the participants or instructors re- extends to more traditional learning environ- flected fondly on the study. Reflecting on our ments (and vice versa). experience during data collection, we now feel Third, a growing literature (Brady, Hard, & that sequestering students into independent Gross, 2018; Jamieson, Peters, Greenwood, & spheres with headphones and iPads, although Altose, 2016) has provided evidence that cog- appealing for the rigorous experimental control nitive reappraisal can also be effective in down- it offered, may have been poor for pedagogical regulating anxiety prior to taking assessments, reasons. The classroom is a rich social environ- particularly in mathematics, and that this down- ment, and much of learning is relational—both regulation is associated with better scores. Fu- academic learning and learning how to imple- ture work should tease out the extent to which ment multifaceted techniques like mindfulness. cognitive reappraisal can affect initial learning For instance, bidirectional emotional transmis- of material versus retrieval of learned material, This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. sions between students and the instructor are and whether targeted interventions might pro- This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. likely to have a great impact on learning (Fren- vide reappraisal training for both emotions re- zel, Becker-Kurz, Pekrun, Goetz, & Lüdtke, lated to the process of learning and to the chal- 2018). Interventions that use technology to iso- lenge of performance and assessment. late students and professors from each other In sum, we observed significant effects of may be contraindicated. focusing activities and cognitive reappraisal at Finally, the interventions targeted everyday the start of class on long-term learning. It may negative emotional scenarios like worrying about be that offering these tools in the context of the test scores or feeling confused by the class mate- shared social environment of the classroom rial. As noted in the introduction, many students would be even more powerful. We plan to test grapple with negative emotions surrounding far this intriguing possibility in future research. 20 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

References Felver, J. C., Celis-de Hoyos, C. E., Tezanos, K., & Singh, N. N. (2016). A systematic review of mind- Bellinger, D. B., DeCaro, M. S., & Ralston, P. A. S. fulness-based interventions for youth in school set- (2015). Mindfulness, anxiety, and high-stakes tings. Mindfulness, 7, 34–45. http://dx.doi.org/10 mathematics performance in the laboratory and .1007/s12671-015-0389-4 classroom. Consciousness and Cognition: An In- Frenzel, A. C., Becker-Kurz, B., Pekrun, R., Goetz, ternational Journal, 37, 123–132. http://dx.doi T., & Lüdtke, O. (2018). Emotion transmission in .org/10.1016/j.concog.2015.09.001 the classroom revisited: A reciprocal effects model Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of of teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Ed- instructors’ autonomy support and students’ auton- ucational Psychology, 110, 628–639. http://dx.doi omous motivation on learning organic chemistry: .org/10.1037/edu0000228 A self-determination theory perspective. Science Gadermann, A. M., Guhn, M., & Zumbo, B. D. Education, 84, 740–756. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert- 1098-237X(200011)84:6Ͻ740::AID-SCE4Ͼ3.0 type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, .CO;2-3 empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assess- Bower, G. H. (1992). How might emotions affect ment, Research & Evaluation, 17, 1–13. Retrieved learning? In S. Christianson (Ed.), The handbook from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?vϭ17&nϭ3 of emotion and memory: Research and theory (pp. Goldrick-Rab, S. (2016). Paying the price: College 3–31). Hillsdale, NJ: Psychology Press. costs, financial aid, and the betrayal of the Amer- Brady, S. T., Hard, B. M., & Gross, J. J. (2018). ican dream. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Reappraising test anxiety increases academic per- Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780 formance of first-year college students. Journal of 226404486.001.0001 Educational Psychology, 110, 395–406. http://dx Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implemen- .doi.org/10.1037/edu0000219 tation intentions and goal achievement: A meta- Brunyé, T. T., Mahoney, C. R., Giles, G. E., Rapp, analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Ex- D. N., Taylor, H. A., & Kanarek, R. B. (2013). perimental Social Psychology, 38, 69–119. http:// Learning to relax: Evaluating four brief interven- dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1 tions for overcoming the negative emotions ac- Götz, T., & Hall, N. C. (2013). Emotion and achieve- companying math anxiety. Learning and Individ- ment in the classroom. International guide to stu- ual Differences, 27, 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ dent achievement. Advance online publication. Re- j.lindif.2013.06.008 trieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de: Calma-Birling, D., & Gurung, R. A. (2017). Does a bsz:352-219285 brief mindfulness intervention impact quiz perfor- Graesser, A. C., & D’Mello, S. (2012). Emotions mance? Psychology Learning & Teaching, 16, during the learning of difficult material. Psychol- 323–335. ogy of Learning and Motivation, 57, 183–225. Cavanagh, S. R. (2016). The spark of learning: En- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394293-7 ergizing the college classroom with the science of .00005-4 emotion. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia Uni- Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current sta- versity Press. tus and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, Champely, S. (2018). pwr: Basic functions for power 26, 1–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1047840X analysis. R package Version 1.2 2. Retrieved from .2014.940781 https://CRAN.R-project.org/packageϭpwr Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differ- Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load ences in two emotion regulation processes: Impli- theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and cations for affect, relationships, and well-being. Instruction, 8, 293–332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. s1532690xci0804_2 348–362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85 This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualChiesa, user and is not to be disseminated broadly. A., & Serretti, A. (2011). Mindfulness based .2.348 cognitive therapy for psychiatric disorders: A sys- Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. (2007). Emotion regu- tematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Re- lation: Conceptual foundations. In J. J. Gross search, 187, 441–453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 1–22). .psychres.2010.08.011 New York, NY: Guilford Press. D’Mello, S. K., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of Harackiewicz, J. M., & Hulleman, C. S. (2010). The affective states during complex learning. Learning importance of interest: The role of achievement and Instruction, 22, 145–157. http://dx.doi.org/10 goals and task values in promoting the develop- .1016/j.learninstruc.2011.10.001 ment of interest. Social and Personality Psychol- Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of ogy Compass, 4, 42–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ success. New York, NY: Random House Digital. j.1751-9004.2009.00207.x EMOTION LEARNING 21

Harackiewicz, J. M., & Priniski, S. J. (2018). Improv- 3–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(06) ing student outcomes in higher education: The 56001-7 science of targeted intervention. Annual Review of Lieberman, M. D., Eisenberger, N. I., Crockett, M. J., Psychology, 69, 409–435. http://dx.doi.org/10 Tom, S. M., Pfeifer, J. H., & Way, B. M. (2007). .1146/annurev-psych-122216-011725 Putting feelings into words: Affect labeling disrupts Harley, J. M., Pekrun, R., Taxer, J. L., & Gross, J. J. amygdala activity in response to affective stimuli. (2019). Emotion regulation in achievement situa- Psychological Science, 18, 421–428. http://dx.doi tions: An integrated model. Educational Psychol- .org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01916.x ogist, 54, 106–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ Malekzadeh, M., Mustafa, M. B., & Lahsasna, A. 00461520.2019.1587297 (2015). A review of emotion regulation in intelli- Hofmann, S. G., Sawyer, A. T., Witt, A. A., & Oh, D. gent tutoring systems. Journal of Educational (2010). The effect of mindfulness-based therapy on Technology & Society, 18, 435–445. anxiety and depression: A meta-analytic review. Mather, M., & Sutherland, M. R. (2011). Arousal- Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, biased competition in perception and memory. 169–183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0018555 Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 114– Huk, T., & Ludwigs, S. (2009). Combining cognitive 133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691611400234 and affective support in order to promote learning. McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll Learning and Instruction, 19, 495–505. http://dx take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23, 412– .doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.09.001 433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/met0000144 Hulleman, C. S., & Barron, K. E. (2015). Motivation Moore, A. M., McAuley, A. J., Allred, G. A., & interventions in education. In L. Corno & E. M. Ashcraft, M. H. (2014). Mathematics anxiety, Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psy- working memory, and mathematical performance. chology (pp. 160–171). New York, NY: Rout- In S. Chinn (Ed.), The Routledge international ledge. handbook of dyscalculia and mathematical learn- Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We ing difficulties (pp. 326–336). London: Routledge. feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective Noone, C., & Hogan, M. J. (2018). A randomised and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, active-controlled trial to examine the effects of an and Education, 1, 3–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ online mindfulness intervention on executive con- j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x trol, critical thinking and key thinking dispositions in Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Gotlieb, R. (2017). Embod- a university student sample. BMC Psychology, 6, ied brains, social minds, cultural meaning. American 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40359-018-0226-3 Educational Research Journal, 54(Suppl.), 344S– 367S. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0002831216669780 Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of Jamieson, J. P., Peters, B. J., Greenwood, E. J., & achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, Altose, A. J. (2016). Reappraising stress arousal and implications for educational research and prac- improves performance and reduces evaluation anx- tice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315– iety in classroom exam situations. Social Psycho- 341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9 logical and Personality Science, 7, 579–587. Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Marsh, H. W., Murayama, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550616644656 K., & Goetz, T. (2017). Achievement emotions and Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using academic performance: Longitudinal models of re- the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress. ciprocal effects. Child Development, 88, 1653–1670. Delacorte, NY: Delta. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12704 Kensinger, E. A., & Schacter, D. L. (2008). Memory Preece, D. A., Becerra, R., Robinson, K., & Gross, and emotion. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, J. J. (2019). The Emotion Regulation Question- & L. Feldman Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emo- naire: Psychometric properties in general commu- tions (3rd Edition, pp. 601–617). New York, NY: nity samples. Journal of Personality Assessment. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Guilford Press. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10 This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualKim, user and is not to be disseminated broadly. C., & Hodges, C. B. (2012). Effects of an .1080/00223891.2018.1564319 emotion control treatment on academic emotions, Prestwich, A., Perugini, M., & Hurling, R. (2010). Can motivation and achievement in an online mathe- implementation intentions and text messages pro- matics course. Instructional Science, 40, 173–192. mote brisk walking? A randomized trial. Health Psy- http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9165-6 chology, 29, 40–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Lang, J. M. (2016). Small teaching: Everyday lessons a0016993 from the science of learning. San Francisco, CA: R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment Wiley. for statistical computing [Computer software]. Lang, P. J., & Davis, M. (2006). Emotion, motivation, Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical and the brain: Reflex foundations in animal and hu- Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R- man research. Progress in Brain Research, 156, project.org/ 22 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

Ramsburg, J. T., & Youmans, R. J. (2014). Medita- Tamir, M., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., & Gross, J. J. tion in the higher-education classroom: Meditation (2007). Implicit theories of emotion: Affective and training improves student knowledge retention social outcomes across a major life transition. during lectures. Mindfulness, 5, 431–441. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, Revelle, W. (2018). Psych: Procedures for psycho- 731–744. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92 logical, psychometric, and personality research. .4.731 Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. Retrieved Yamada, K., & Victor, T. L. (2012). The impact of ϭ from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package psych mindful awareness practices on college student Roediger, H. L., III, & Butler, A. C. (2011). The health, well-being, and capacity for learning: A critical role of retrieval practice in long-term re- pilot study. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 11, tention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 20–27. 139–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003 Waters, L., Barsky, A., Ridd, A., & Allen, K. (2015). Roediger, H. L., III, & Marsh, E. J. (2005). The Contemplative education: A systematic, evidence- positive and negative consequences of multiple- choice testing. Journal of Experimental Psychol- based review of the effect of meditation interven- ogy: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1155– tions in schools. Educational Psychology Review, 1159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.5 27, 103–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648- .1155 014-9258-2 Shiota, M. N., & Kalat, J. W. (2017). Emotion (3rd Webb, T. L., Miles, E., & Sheeran, P. (2012). ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Dealing with feeling: A meta-analysis of the Strain, A. C., & D’Mello, S. K. (2015). Affect reg- effectiveness of strategies derived from the pro- ulation during learning: The enhancing effect of cess model of emotion regulation. Psychological cognitive reappraisal. Applied Cognitive Psychol- Bulletin, 138, 775–808. http://dx.doi.org/10 ogy, 29, 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acp.3049 .1037/a0027600

Appendix

Text of Interventions Text for Reappraisal As you deal with these emotions in and out of the classroom, it may become difficult to focus College is an exciting time full of opportunity on your work. Distractions may become tempt- and novel experiences. You are encountering ing both in the classroom and when you are new ideas, new experiences, and new friend- studying. ships. All of this is natural, and your peers are going But it can also be an intimidating time. You through it too. Learning is incremental, gradual, may have doubts about how well you perform, often frustrating, and it is WORK. The point how you measure up against your fellow peers, isn’t getting it right away, or absorbing it all like and what your professors think of your abilities. a sponge. You may also find the process of learning to The point of this exercise is to acknowledge be occasionally confusing, frustrating, boring, these emotions and reassure you that they are a and even discouraging. natural part of the college experience and the This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. And these are just the academic concerns. learning process. The point of this exercise is This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individualYou user and is not to be disseminated broadly. might also have concerns about your also to give you some tools to manage emotions friendships, about your romantic relationships, and distractions when they arise during class so or about how you fit in with your social circle. that you can focus on learning.

(Appendix continues) EMOTION LEARNING 23

One method you can use to manage these ❏ that the best rewards in learning occur by working emotions is to think differently about the situ- through initial confusion. ation you’re in, the challenges that you are ❏ that I am being challenged, and that means that both facing, and/or your emotional response to them. my professor and I care about my learning. Research shows that people who choose to re- (Anxiety Condition) frame emotional situations and responses by thinking differently about them can successfully IF I find myself becoming nervous about speaking in class, about my performance in answering questions in change their emotional experiences and the im- class or on quizzes or tests, or about my grade in the class, pact they might have on performance. The reg- THEN I will instead think about... ular practice of this sort of rethinking is associ- ❏ how everyone gets nervous sometimes, and that my ated with lower levels of depression and anxiety nervousness means this class and my progress is im- and higher levels of psychological well-being. portant to me. For instance, you might tell yourself that your ❏ the fact that the best performances arise from a classmates are also facing the same sorts of manageable level of nervousness. challenges. You could remind yourself that part ❏ that this is just one day, and if I don’t perform well of the process of learning is first trying and I’ll have other opportunities to work hard and change failing, and so feelings of frustration are actu- my grade. ally signs of progress. You might also remem- ber your professor wishes to challenge you and thus values your learning. Text for Mindfulness We are going to present three scenarios to you and then some options for how you might The college experience is one that is exciting think differently in order to manage your emo- and full of new experiences and new opportu- tional response. nities for growth–both intellectual and social. Please read the scenario, and then click next. But new experiences can also carry chal- Afterward please read the three options, and lenges, and be overwhelming. You may worry choose the one you plan to implement most about your performance in class, your relative often or most strongly in class today. progress compared with your peers, and your professors’ opinions about your skills. (Boredom Condition) In doing classwork and homework, you may IF I find myself losing interest and focus, becoming sometimes be confused, frustrated, bored, and tempted to think about or do things unrelated to class, even discouraged. THEN I will instead think about... And that is just on the classroom side. You ❏ the value of my education and how it will contribute may also have doubts about how you are fitting to a bettering of my mind and life. in socially, whether you can rely on your ❏ that I chose this class and this degree program, and friends, and how your romantic life is going. that both will help me achieve my long-term goals. As you confront feelings about all of these ❏ that focusing now will help me on my later home- academic and social matters, you may have work and exams, and thus be better in the long run. trouble focusing on your work. You may be- (Frustration/Confusion Condition) come easily distracted when attempting to do work in the classroom or study at home. IF I find myself becoming irritated and frustrated with

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This is all normal. Your peers are experienc- my progress, my professor, or my peers, or ﬁnd myself

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to befeeling disseminated broadly. lost and confused, THEN I will instead think ing it too. The process of learning is incremen- about... tal, gradual, often frustrating, and it is WORK. ❏ the fact that frustration actually means I’m making The point isn’t getting it right away, or absorb- progress in learning. ing it all like a sponge.

(Appendix continues) 24 CAVANAGH, LANG, BIRK, FULWILER, AND URRY

The point of this exercise is to acknowledge (Frustration/Confusion Condition) these emotions and reassure you that they are a IF I find myself becoming irritated and frustrated with natural part of the college experience and the my progress, my professor, or my peers, or find myself learning process. The point of this exercise is feeling lost and confused, THEN I will instead... also to give you some tools to manage emotions ❏ get really curious about how I’m feeling, noticing as and distractions when they arise during class so much as I can about the frustration and how it feels in that you can focus on learning. my body without trying to do anything them. One such method is to approach these emotions ❏ just notice the confusion and/or frustration as I with mindfulness. Mindfulness is a practice and a normally would. skill everyone is capable of that allows us to be ❏ acknowledge and accept these feelings as much as present from moment to moment with a nonjudg- possible, without reacting to them, engaging in them, mental, compassionate awareness. or judging them as good or bad. People who practice mindfulness report feel- (Anxiety Condition) ing calmer and less overwhelmed by difficult thoughts and emotions. IF I find myself becoming nervous about my perfor- For instance, when you find yourself becom- mance in answering questions in class or on quizzes or ing distracted by uncomfortable emotions, you tests, or about my grade in the class, THEN I will could bring your attention back to the present instead... moment by focusing on your breath. ❏ let this nervousness be, accepting it as it is, not You could also try to let these feelings pass trying to change it or make it go away. through you without judging them or trying to ❏ Pay close attention to this nervousness and any change them. related body sensations and notice how it changes from By increasing our awareness in this way we moment to moment. become less reactive to challenges and even ❏ notice the feeling of nervousness without trying to investigate and accept our experiences with cu- do anything about it. riosity and kindness. We are going to present three scenarios to Text for One-Sample Informational you and then some options for how you might Control (Math) notice and accept your emotional response. Please read the scenario, and then click next. Long viewed by many as the stereotypically Afterward please read the three options, and useless major, philosophy is now being seen by choose the one you plan you would be likely to many students and prospective employers as a implement most often or most strongly in class to- very useful and practical major, offering stu- day. dents a host of transferable skills with relevance (Boredom Condition) to the modern workplace. IF I find myself losing interest and focus, becoming In broad terms, philosophy is the study of tempted to think about or do things unrelated to class, meaning and the values underlying thought and THEN I will instead... behavior. But more pragmatically, the disci- ❏ simply notice that I am thinking about topics unre- pline encourages students to analyze complex lated to class without trying to do anything about it. material, question conventional beliefs, and ex- ❏ be really curious about this experience, noticing as press thoughts in a concise manner. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. much as I can about these thoughts, and any feelings Because philosophy teaches students not This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to beand/or disseminated broadly. body sensations that are also present. what to think but how to think, the age-old ❏ accept and be with whatever I’m thinking and feeling without reacting to it, judging it as good or bad, or discipline offers consistently useful tools for trying to change it. academic and professional achievement.

(Appendix continues) EMOTION LEARNING 25

A 1994 survey concluded that only 18 percent studying philosophy allows them to be flexible of American colleges required at least one philos- and adaptable. High demand, advanced exam ophy course. Therefore, between 1992 and 1996, scores, and varied professional skills all argue more than 400 independent philosophy depart- for maintaining and enhancing philosophy ments were eliminated from institutions. courses and majors within academic institu- More recently, colleges have recognized the tions. practicality and increasing popularity of study- Question One ing philosophy and have markedly increased the number of philosophy programs offered. By According to this piece, over time the popularity of 2008 there were 817 programs, up from 765 a philosophy as a major decade before. In addition, the number of four- A) was high, then declined, is now increasing again. year graduates in philosophy has grown 46 per- B) was low, then rose, is now declining again. cent in a decade. C) has remained steady over time. Also, studies have found that those students Question Two who major in philosophy often do better than As used in the sentence “But more pragmatically, the students from other majors in both verbal rea- discipline encourages students to analyze complex ma- soning and analytical writing. These results can terial, question conventional beliefs, and express be measured by standardized test scores. On the thoughts in a concise manner,” the word “discipline” Graduate Record Examination (GRE), for ex- most nearly means ample, students intending to study philosophy A) a way of behaving that shows a willingness to in graduate school scored higher than students obey rules or orders. in all but four other majors. B) area of scholarly study. C) methods implemented to reduce a behavior. These days, many students majoring in philosophy have no intention of becoming philos- Question Three ophers; instead they plan to apply those skills to Philosophy is again becoming popular as a major be- other disciplines. Law and business specifically cause benefit from the complicated theoretical issues A) more students want to be philosophers for a raised in the study of philosophy, but philoso- living. phy can be just as useful in engineering or any B) the media has recently portrayed successful phi- field requiring complex analytic skills. losophers. That these skills are transferable across profes- C) analytical thinking and argumentation are highly sions makes them especially beneficial to twenty- relevant in the modern workplace. first-century students. Because today’s students Received May 30, 2019 can expect to hold multiple jobs—some of which Revision received September 7, 2019 may not even exist yet—during their lifetime, Accepted September 23, 2019 Ⅲ This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.