Next Article in Journal
Unspoken, Unseen, Unheard: Using Arts-Based and Visual Research Methods to Gain Insights into Lived Experiences of Suicide in Young Adults
Previous Article in Journal
Redistricting and Black Political Mobilization: Implications from the 2018 and 2022 Midterm Elections
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Social Sciences
Volume 14
Issue 2
10.3390/socsci14020061
socsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Effectiveness of Kindness Intervention for Promoting Positive Emotions and Reducing Depressive Symptoms in Mexican Adults

by
Jorge Palacios-Delgado
1,*,
Marcos Ambriz-Flores
1 and
Daniela Judith Cruz-Vargas
2
1
Unidad de Investigación en Neurociencias, Facultad de Psicología, Universidad del Valle de México, Campus Querétaro, Blvd. Juriquilla No. 1000 A, Del. Santa Rosa Jáuregui, Santiago de Querétaro 76230, Mexico
2
Facultad de Psicología, Universidad del Valle de México, Campus Querétaro, Blvd. Juriquilla No. 1000 A, Del. Santa Rosa Jáuregui, Santiago de Querétaro 76230, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Soc. Sci. 2025, 14(2), 61; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14020061
Submission received: 7 November 2024 / Revised: 17 January 2025 / Accepted: 17 January 2025 / Published: 26 January 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: In recent years, research has noted that depression is a prevalent mental health problem worldwide, including in Mexico among adults. Psychological interventions, such as those based on kindness, have shown promise in reducing depressive symptoms. However, there is little research in cultural contexts such as Mexico. In this context, the objective of the present research was to evaluate the preliminary efficacy of a brief intervention of performing kind acts (amabilidad) to increase happiness level as well as positive affect and reduce negative affect and depression symptoms among Mexican adults. Methods: A feasibility study was carried out with a pre-post intervention design with a control group of Mexican adults. The study used validated scales to measure happiness, positive and negative affect, and depression symptoms before and after the intervention. Participants received a brief intervention that included exercises to write expressions of kindness and practice acts of kindness towards themselves and others. Results: Preliminary results suggest that the kindness-based intervention produced improvements in their happiness, decreases in negative affect, and a significant reduction in depression symptoms compared to baseline levels and the control group. Conclusions: The findings of this study support the feasibility and potential effectiveness of kindness-based interventions to reduce depressive symptoms in Mexican adults.

1. Introduction

In recent years, depression has affected 3.6 million people in Mexico (Secretaría de Salud 2022), reflecting the seriousness of this problem in the country. Positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000) emerges as a promising alternative to promote happiness and well-being through the strengthening of positive aspects of the individual (Seligman et al. 2006), such as gratitude (Rash et al. 2011), optimism (Palacios-Delgado and Acevedo-Ibarra 2023), and kindness (Otake et al. 2006). These positive emotions not only contribute to happiness but also protect against depression (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005a; Palacios-Delgado et al. 2024). In contrast, feeling negative states such as hopelessness (Choi and Shin 2023) or stress (Maydych 2019) can increase the risk of mental disorders and impair mental and physical health (Piqueras Rodríguez et al. 2009).
The evidence for the effectiveness of positive psychology interventions (PPIs) shows that they can be effective in enhancing well-being (Bolier et al. 2013; Seligman et al. 2005). Positive emotion interventions consistently demonstrate the minimization of depressive symptoms (Carr et al. 2020; Taylor et al. 2017) as well as improvement in happiness (Lambert et al. 2019). These types of interventions are aimed at increasing the presence of positive emotions (Sin and Lyubomirsky 2009).

1.1. Kindness and Happiness

Recently, acts of kindness have been used in positive interventions (Kerr et al. 2015). Kindness interventions contribute to people’s general well-being and happiness, as has been shown in several studies (Aknin et al. 2012; Curry et al. 2018; Otake et al. 2006). For example, Lyubomirsky et al. (2005b) conducted an intervention in which university students were asked to perform five acts of kindness per week for six weeks, which resulted in a significant increase in happiness. Similarly, Otake et al. 2006 found that performing more acts of kindness increases happiness.

1.2. Kindness and Positive and Negative Affect

Kindness interventions have also been shown to be effective in enhancing positive emotions (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005a; Nelson et al. 2016; Sheldon and Lyubomirsky 2006). In one study, people who performed acts of kindness towards others and remembered acts of kindness increased positive affect more than those in the control condition (Ko et al. 2019). Most recently, (Datu et al. 2022) found that university students who participated in kindness activities, such as listing acts of kindness, experienced greater positive emotions compared to a control group. In short, it has been found that there are studies that show that performing acts of kindness leads to greater positive affect and lower negative affect, and women had higher positive affect scores (Pressman et al. 2015).

1.3. Kindness and Depression Symptoms

A few short interventions have been developed to harness positive psychological resources and promote well-being (Bolier et al. 2013). Interest in improving symptoms of depression has increased in recent years since the Covid-19 pandemic (Huang et al. 2024). The evidence suggests that performing kind acts towards others helps reduce depressive symptom levels in young populations (Totzeck et al. 2020) and hemodialysis patients (Hernandez et al. 2018). Cregg and Cheavens (2022), for example, showed that symptoms of depression/anxiety improve when acts of kindness are performed. In their study, Haydon et al. (2022) found that compared to controls, those participants who engaged in self-kindness meditation and acts of kindness toward others reported a decrease in feelings of depression. Finally, participants who do loving kindness meditation (LKM) and acts of kindness reported significant reductions in depression at the post-test compared with those in the control condition (Mongrain et al. 2018).

1.4. Culture and Positive Psychology Interventions

One of the criticisms of research testing positive psychology interventions is that they have been conducted mainly in Anglo/European samples (Layous et al. 2013; Lyubomirsky et al. 2005b; Seligman et al. 2005) and mainly from an individualist perspective (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000). Undoubtedly, culture guides patterns of thinking, emotions, and behavior (Church 2009; Díaz-Loving 2019; Markus and Kitayama 2003; Díaz-Guerrero 1995) and affects how people practice or benefit (or not) from positive activities (Layous et al. 2014), e.g., if a positive activity provokes conflicting emotions, members of a collectivist culture (Soler-Anguiano et al. 2023; Triandis 2001) may be more likely to experience bittersweet feelings than members of individualistic cultures who have adapted to deal with conflict (Triandis et al. 1984).
While there is a clear need for research on strategies to improve mental health across collectivist or individualistic cultures, researchers need to be careful in the definitions and measurements they use within the interventions that take place in each culture (Palacios 2021; Palacios and Martínez 2017). Consistent with this notion, activities carried out in a kindness (amabilidad in Spanish) intervention can foster affective closeness and collaboration among people in collectivist cultures by expressing affection or sympathy under the expected norms of maintaining the well-being of the collective group (Triandis et al. 1984). In contrast, in individuals from individualistic cultures (European or American), performing acts of kindness (as a form of altruism or goodness) is relatively less expected (Shin et al. 2019).

1.5. Current Research

On the other hand, there is a lack of evidence-based interventions with the economically active adult population in Mexico to improve their mental health. The PPI model of intervention has broad empirical evidence that positive interventions may be effective (Bolier et al. 2013; Moskowitz et al. 2021; Seligman et al. 2005); therefore, and consequently, it is important to determine not only whether an intervention is effective but why it is effective (Cregg and Cheavens 2022). The evidence so far suggests that performing acts of kindness effectively contributes to an increase in positive emotional state and a decrease in depressive symptoms.

1.6. Objectives and Hypothesis

Therefore, to investigate this idea, considering the still few intervention studies on kindness (amabilidad in Spanish), in the pilot phase, the objective of this study was to create and evaluate the preliminary efficacy of an intervention of performing kind acts (amabilidad) to increase happiness level as well as positive affect and reduce negative affect and depression symptoms among Mexican adults. We hypothesized that due to their interdependent orientation, Mexicans adults that perform kind acts would experience greater happiness, increased positive affect, decreased negative affect, and reduced depression symptoms after participating in the intervention, compared to their level baseline and the control group condition.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Design Research

This study is a longitudinal study with a quasi-experimental design with two groups: an intervention group that performed acts of kindness and a control group that did not perform any specific intervention, both with pre-test and post-test evaluations (Ato et al. 2013). To carry out the research, two groups were integrated. The control group was selected intentionally, with university students taking a class with a duration of three hours. This course was divided into two periods of one hour and thirty minutes each, equivalent to the intervention time of the experimental group.
We conducted a study to inform the development of an intervention based on positive psychology to increase positive emotions among adult people. In this phase, we examined the feasibility of the proposed intervention. We gathered initial evidence of the efficacy by examining the changes in happiness, positive affect, and negative affect between the baseline and post intervention measurements and the control group. The total duration of the intervention was 2 h and 30 min. In the pre-test evaluation, the instructions for each instrument used were followed. For the post-test evaluation, the participants were instructed to consider their answers from the end of the intervention (experimental group) or the end of the class taken on that day (control group).

2.2. Participants

Participants were adults selected through non-probabilistic sampling, including 14 participants, 71.4% women and 28.6% men between 28 and 61 years of age (M = 41.77; SD = 10.6) who were studying at the university. The inclusion criteria were considered to be university students, to be enrolled at the university, to have a schedule with availability to participate voluntarily, and to sign the informed consent to be part of the research. The exclusion criteria included reporting any psychiatric diagnosis that could interfere with their participation in the intervention. The control group was made up of 13 university students in the working adult category; 76.9% (n = 10) were women, and 23.1% (n = 3) were men, with an age range between 23 and 50 years and a mean age of 32.92 (SD = 8.1) years old.

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. Acts of Kindness

The frequency of acts of kindness performed by participants was monitored and described by completing a digital form before the intervention session. Additionally, acts of kindness they received from others, acts of kindness they performed for themselves, and acts of kindness they performed for other people such as family, friends, or strangers were recorded. Examples of acts of kindness included the following: “I visited my friends I hadn’t seen in a while”, “I gave my mom a hug when I got home from school”, and “I wrote a letter to my best friend”. Importantly, participants were told that acts of kindness had to involve positive experiences and emotions.

2.3.2. Self-Assessment of Happiness

A modified version of the self-assessment of happiness scale proposed by Abdel-Khalek (2006) was used. For the present study, a single statement was used, and the level of happiness of the last 30 days was asked on a numerical estimation scale from 1 to 10 displayed horizontally with equal intervals. Participants were instructed to consider that 1 is the minimum score and that 10 is the maximum score; they were instructed to write the number that best described their feelings. The scale has a one-week test-retest reliability of 0.86, which denotes high temporal stability.

2.3.3. Positive and Negative Affect (PANAS)

The PANAS is a 20-item self-report that assesses the frequency of positive and negative emotional experiences. Individuals rate how frequently they experience each emotional state on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = extremely. The Spanish version was used (Robles and Páez 2003). The mean score of positive and negative affect was computed. Internal consistency reliability in the present sample was α = 0.89 [CI 95% = 0.88–0.90] for the positive subscale and α = 0.86 for the negative subscale [CI 95% = 0.84–0.87].

2.3.4. Depressive Symptoms

The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for Depression (PHQ-9) is a screening scale that measures the presence and severity of depressive symptoms (Kroenke et al. 2001). It employs a 4-point Likert scale using a range from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day), with total scores ranging from 0 to 27 points (9 items). A cut-off score of 10 points is recommended for evaluation (Huarcaya-Victoria et al. 2020). A Spanish-language version has been standardized (Cassiani-Miranda et al. 2021).

2.4. Procedure

Attendees in the experimental group were invited to participate in a workshop on positive psychology for emotional regulation via a digital form sent through social networks to the community of students in the working adult mode. Both groups (experimental and control) completed measures of happiness, positive and negative affect, agreeableness, and depression before starting the activities.
The intervention group was instructed to perform different kindness activities for the duration of the intervention (Table 1). Acts of kindness could include actions to help others, acts or expressions for themselves, or simply offering words of affection to others. In total, each participant performed six activities during the intervention, which lasted 2 h 30 min. The control group did not receive any specific instructions. At the end of the intervention, all participants again completed the same measures as in the pre-test. After completing the final assessment, participants in the experimental group received feedback for participating.
The activities carried out by the students in the control group are typical of a psychology course on child and adolescent development. In the first hour and a half, the students discussed a lecture on adolescent development, with group interaction activities to study the topic. During the next hour and a half, powerpoint slides showing psychosocial development in adolescence were projected. At the end of the class, the students performed an activity to grade the knowledge learned in the subject. Before the end of the class, students were asked to take the post-test evaluation.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

First, descriptive characteristics of the overall sample were obtained, including demographic information (sex, age, occupation) as well as the means and standard deviations for the variables in the study. Second, multivariate normality was calculated for the total sample, applying the Shapiro-Wilk test and the skewness and kurtosis test. Mann–Whitney U tests were used to determine the differences in happiness, positive and negative affect, and depression symptoms between the intervention and control group. To assess differences in happiness and positive and negative affect between the pre- and post-intervention assessments, we used the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test. Throughout all the analyses, p ≤ 0.05 was interpreted as statistically significant. Effect sizes (for the mean differences between the baseline and post-intervention) were reported as rB (r = z/√n) for nonparametric data and interpreted using the conventional metrics of small = 0.10, medium = 0.30, and large = 0.50 (Fritz et al. 2012). In addition, in order to assess the effectiveness of the intervention, logistic regression models with the forward stepwise method were performed to determine whether post-intervention assessment measurements were significantly different from baseline measurements of depressive symptoms.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Statistics

For skewness and kurtosis, we found that only positive affect (skewness = 0.28; kurtosis = −1.7) fell within the ±1.5 range (Ferrando and Anguiano-Carrasco 2010), while the other constructs had expected values. The normality of the data was checked according to the Shapiro–Wilk (S–W) test. Depression symptoms [S-W (gl = 14) = 0.91, p = 0.18], happiness [S-W (gl = 14) = 0.91, p = 0.18], and negative affect [S-W (gl = 14) = 0.90, p = 0.12] had normal distributions, except for positive affect [S-W (gl = 14) = 0.86, p < 0.05]; non-parametric tests were used.
First, the incidence of gender and age in depressive symptomatology was verified. In the pre-test evaluation, the depressive symptomatology score was compared between men and women. No significant differences were found (men: M = 11.50, SD = 5.4; women: M = 8.50; SD = 5.9; U = 11,500; p = 0.22). Due to the wide age range of the participants, which could distort the depressive symptoms, the relationship between them was verified. No significant association was found between age and depressive symptomatology before the intervention. (r = −0.30; p = 0.24).
Before beginning, we compared the assessments between the intervention and control groups. The results indicate that there are no significant differences between groups before the intervention in acts of kindness (U = 61.5, Z = −1.19, p = 0.23), happiness (U = 86.500, Z = −0.22.2, p = 0.83), positive affect (U = 90.00, Z = −0.049, p = 0.98), or negative affect (U = 61.00, Z = −1.46, p = 0.98), or for symptoms of depression (U = 82.00, Z = 0.43, p = 0.68).

3.2. Pre-Test—Post-Test Comparison in Intervention and Control Groups

Table 2 shows the results obtained before and after treatment. In the intervention group, statistically significant changes were found in acts of kindness (Z = 2.48; p < 0.05; rB = 0.75), happiness (Z = −3.09; p < 0.001; rB = 1.00), and positive (Z = −2.94; p < 0.001; rB = 1.00) and negative (Z = −3.07; p < 0.001; rB = 1.00) affect, in addition to the depression indicators (Z = −2.93; p < 0.01; rB = 0.95). The analysis revealed a moderate to large effect size of the intervention on depressive symptomatology. This finding suggests that the proposed intervention is a promising strategy for the improvement of depressive symptoms.
In the control group, no statistically significant differences were found for acts of kindness (Z = −0.91; p = 0.36), happiness (Z = −0.35; p = 0.72), positive (Z = −0.19; p = 0.84) and negative affect (Z = −1.21; p = 0.22), or levels of depression (Z = −0.10; p = 0.21) before and after the time established for this group, as shown in Table 1.
Finally, we examined the influence of the intervention on depressive symptoms as a dichotomous variable based on 0 = absence of depressive symptoms (score less than 9) and 1 = presence of depressive symptoms (score greater than 10). The logistic regression model was statistically significant [χ2 (1) = 6.59, p < 0.05]. The model correctly classified 92.9% of the cases. The negative emotions were associated with a decrease in depressive symptoms, with an R2 Nagelkerke of 0.58. The incorporation of an intervention based on kindness reduces negative emotions by 2.1 times and the probability of having depressive symptoms in adults (β = 0.78; OR = 2.19; CI 95% = 0.81–5.88, p < 0.05).

4. Discussion

The main goal of this research was to determine the effectiveness of acts of kindness (amabilidad) on depressive symptoms, happiness, and positive and negative affect compared to a control group. The results obtained provide definitive evidence that an intervention that integrates kindness reminders, promoting expressions of kindness towards oneself, and performing acts of kindness towards others improves positive emotional state, reduces negative emotional state, and decreases symptoms of depression as structured and tested in this study. The results demonstrated that in line with the main hypothesis, participants who performed acts of kindness showed greater improvements in depressive symptoms, greater happiness and positive affect, and less negative affect post-intervention and in comparison, with the control group.

4.1. Theoretical Implications

The results of the study show that the acts of kindness performed by the participants generated a significant increase in positive emotions (Otake et al. 2006; Curry et al. 2018). The increase in positive emotion scores suggests that activities that promote the expression and recall of kind acts increase positive emotions such as gratitude (Ko et al. 2019). These findings are consistent with previous studies (Pressman et al. 2015; Kerr et al. 2015) indicating that kindness improves gratitude and the quality of social interactions (Nelson et al. 2016), contributing to positive emotional state (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005b). The activities of remembering and sharing kind acts played a key role in activating these positive emotions, suggesting that kindness has a direct impact on promoting beneficial emotional states.
In addition, a decrease in negative emotions was observed among participants who performed acts of kindness (Curry et al. 2018; Nelson et al. 2016). The decrease in negative emotion scores suggests that kindness helped to reduce emotions such as sadness. This effect may be related to the ability of kindness to counteract negative emotions through prosocial behaviors that strengthen social support (Pressman et al. 2015; Seligman et al. 2005). Activities such as scheduling and performing acts of kindness towards others have been shown to be more effective (Haydon et al. 2022) in reducing negative emotions (Pressman et al. 2015). This finding reinforces the idea that kindness allows individuals to disengage from negative thoughts and focus on positive experiences.
In line with the results found, there was also a significant increase in participants’ happiness scores, indicating that performing acts of kindness contributed to a greater sense of happiness (Kerr et al. 2015). This can be explained by the fact that by performing kind acts towards themselves as well as others, participants strengthened their interpersonal relationships, which contributed to this increase in happiness levels (Nelson et al. 2016; Pressman et al. 2015). These results are consistent with previous studies linking repeated kindness to higher levels of happiness (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005b; Otake et al. 2006).
Finally, the most important finding in this study is the reduction in depressive symptoms from performing acts of kindness. The results show a significant decrease in depressive symptom scores in the experimental group, which supports previous research on the effectiveness of kindness interventions in reducing depressive symptoms (Mongrain et al. 2018; Kerr et al. 2015; Cregg and Cheavens 2022; Totzeck et al. 2020). This effect could be explained by the positive impact of kindness on the reconstruction of positive emotional experiences (Datu et al. 2022; Layous et al. 2014), as shown by the activity of remembering a past act of kindness and performing acts of kindness towards others, which helps to activate positive emotions and gratitude associated with that event (Haydon et al. 2022; Ko et al. 2019). This process of re-experiencing positive emotions could mitigate feelings of sadness and hopelessness (Cassiani-Miranda et al. 2021; Seligman et al. 2005) and contributes to a reduction in depressive symptoms. Kindness (amabilidad), as proposed in our research by performing kindness actions (Curry et al. 2018; Haydon et al. 2022; Ko et al. 2019; Otake et al. 2006), under an ethnopsychological perspective (Palacios 2021; Palacios and Martínez 2017; Díaz-Loving 2019; Palacios-Delgado and Acevedo-Ibarra 2023) is revealed as a key strength that not only enhances happiness but also significantly decreases the prevalence of depressive symptoms.

4.2. Practical Implications

The findings of this research reinforce the principles of positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000), which highlight the value of interventions focused on strengthening positive aspects of the individual to improve well-being and happiness (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005b). Similarly, kindness-based intervention as proposed in the present research helps to mitigate depressive symptoms (Rash et al. 2011; Maydych 2019). The implementation of kindness-based intervention appears to be an effective and accessible strategy to increase levels of happiness (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005b), reducing negative emotions and boosting positive emotions (Datu et al. 2022) in the same way that has been achieved in different cultures (Otake et al. 2006). This is particularly relevant in collectivist cultures like Mexico’s, where kindness can contribute to collective well-being (Triandis et al. 1984; Church 2009; Soler-Anguiano et al. 2023).
In addition, when an intervention is integrated with the principles of positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000; Seligman et al. 2005, 2006) in a context of acceptance, the quality of social interactions (Nelson et al. 2016) is instrumental in participants experiencing positive emotions and changes in their behavior, as observed in the results when compared to the control group. The kindness (amabilidad) intervention proposed in our research that focused on promoting positive emotions has profound practical implications that can contribute both to psychology professionals and to the work environment of employees in a company. In clinical practice, our intervention can inspire the incorporation of new therapeutic techniques based on kindness (Kerr et al. 2015), such as those carried out in our intervention. In this context, empathy between the participants and positive emotional contagion (Ko et al. 2019) were relevant aids to remembering, sharing, and performing acts of kindness, resulting in increased levels of happiness and reduced negative emotions, which together lead to a decrease in depressive symptoms. The results support interventions aimed at reducing depressive symptoms and improving levels of happiness (Cregg and Cheavens 2022; Curry et al. 2018; Otake et al. 2006). Our intervention focused on prevention of mental health problems such as depression by promoting acts of kindness, positively impacting participants’ personal and social relationships (Otake et al. 2006). The kindness-based intervention we have proposed could be extended to the work environment and contribute to creating a more positive work environment, improving productivity and collaboration among workers (Curry et al. 2018).

4.3. Limitations and Suggestions

There are some limitations that could affect the results. The first challenge we faced was the definition of kindness. Derived from the collectivist characteristics of our socio-culture (Soler-Anguiano et al. 2023), for the implementation of our intervention, we considered an ethnopsychological approach. We started from a definition of kindness as a personality trait appropriate in our culture (Palacios and Martínez 2017; Palacios 2021) that emphasizes generosity, sympathy, and courtesy, as opposed to kindliness, which incorporates goodness and altruism. It is therefore relevant to establish a clear and operational definition of kindness in order to evaluate the results of our intervention. The second limitation is the sampling of the intervention group, which was not random, which can introduce biases in the participants, since they decided to participate voluntarily when they were invited, so before participating, they would have had a certain level of motivation to attend the intervention, in addition to the fact that their participation may be driven by underlying factors of being students such as learning about the topic. The third limitation is the sample size of both the intervention (n = 14) and control (n = 13) groups, as they are small; therefore, it seems appropriate that in order to corroborate the results, the study should be replicated in larger samples from different cities. The fourth limitation to discuss corresponds to the research design. Although the results obtained were better in the intervention group versus the control group, it is relevant to consider the information provided in both groups. In the control group, no activity on kindness was performed. This group attended a daily course on child and adolescent development; however, the attendance of the course, the content, and the interaction between the course attendees led to a slight increase in their happiness and in positive emotions and a reduction in negative affect, which would be expected for a course where one is going to learn about child and adolescent development. For the experimental group, given that they were invited to a workshop on positive psychology, they could have generated different expectations of change that could influence the results. From our perspective, a learning circumstance is not enough to generate changes as observed in the control group. On the contrary, the structure of the intervention as presented in the research, with differentiated activities from the analysis of the concept of amabilidad to acts of kindness towards oneself, towards those attending the intervention, and towards other strangers, is what influenced the changes found in our research, as has been predicted in previous studies (Cregg and Cheavens 2022; Datu et al. 2022; Haydon et al. 2022; Ko et al. 2019; Lyubomirsky et al. 2005a; Otake et al. 2006). The conceptual integration with group integration dynamics such as those implemented in the intervention we propose in this research generated an increase in positive affect during and at the end of the intervention and in our perspective are the cause of the changes found at the end of the intervention. Although our findings are promising, particularly for depressive symptoms, follow-up is necessary to corroborate these changes over time, and future studies could verify the temporal stability of the changes found. It is proposed that the intervention be tested again, carrying out subsequent replications of the study, which will allow us to adequately compare the results, as well as to verify its applicability and change over time.
The fifth limitation that must be considered is the absence of a follow-up evaluation. It would be desirable, after a period has passed after the intervention, to perform a follow-up measurement one or two weeks later to verify the effect of the intervention over time. Future studies may incorporate a subsequent follow-up measurement and verify the results obtained in the present study. We propose that future studies compare our findings to brief interventions such as mindfulness or loving kindness and differentiate their effectiveness.

4.4. Contributions and Strengths

Among the strengths of the research, we can mention that it is the first study in Mexico and Latin America that evaluates an intervention on kindness. The findings found provide evidence consistent with previous studies (Kerr et al. 2015; Ko et al. 2019; Otake et al. 2006; Pressman et al. 2015) that obtained similar results to those reported here. The relevance of this research is based on demonstrating that it showed the effect of a kindness intervention that reduces symptoms of depression and increases positive emotional states, including happiness. Manifestations of kindness can vary between different cultures, so it is necessary to adapt interventions to each context. In line with the results obtained, the second strength focuses on proposing an intervention based on kindness that has a theoretical basis in ethnopsychology (Díaz-Loving 2019; Palacios 2021; Palacios and Martínez 2017) and positive psychology (Lambert et al. 2019; Palacios-Delgado et al. 2024; Taylor et al. 2017; Seligman et al. 2006), which allowed us to test its effectiveness in this study, with the aim of reducing symptoms of depression and increasing positive emotional states, including happiness.

4.5. Suggestions for Future Research

The results of this study open several avenues for future research in positive psychology and kindness. For example, the relationship of kindness as conceptualized in this research can be identified with other constructs such as optimism or gratitude (Palacios-Delgado and Acevedo-Ibarra 2023). Second, longitudinal studies can be conducted assessing the long-term impact of kindness interventions in diverse study samples, including different age groups and cultural backgrounds. Third, studies can be conducted to determine the effect of performing acts of kindness on anxiety, stress, and mental health. Finally, our research group is very interested in understanding the interaction of traits such as friendliness with biomarkers such as oxytocin and cortisol in order to reduce mental health problems affecting the population after the Covid-19 pandemic, which is why this has become our line of research to follow. Regarding improvements in the research design, for future studies, we propose enlarging the sample of the intervention and control groups and incorporating two follow-up measurements per week and per month.

5. Conclusions

Our intervention provides sufficient evidence to indicate that interventions based on acts of kindness can significantly improve happiness and increase positive emotions while reducing negative emotions and depressive symptoms in a sample of Mexican adults. The intervention that was integrated for this study involved self-expression and recall of acts of kindness towards oneself and the performance of acts of kindness towards others in an environment characterized by trust and acceptance of new experiences, which facilitated participants’ experience of positive emotions in social interactions. The results highlight the relevance of promoting kindness practices in group contexts, especially in collectivist cultures such as Mexico’s, where such interventions can enhance happiness and emotional well-being. Our findings provide empirical evidence for positive psychology by demonstrating the efficacy of kindness (amabilidad) as an accessible strategy to enhance happiness and positive emotions and reduce negative emotions and depressive symptoms in adults, suggesting its applicability in therapeutic and community settings through generosity.

Author Contributions

Conception and design of the study: J.P.-D.; analysis and interpretation of data: J.P.-D.; writing—review and editing: J.P.-D., M.A.-F. and D.J.C.-V.; supervision and project administration: J.P.-D. and D.J.C.-V.; writing—original draft preparation: J.P.-D., M.A.-F. and D.J.C.-V.; data collection: D.J.C.-V.; data visualization: D.J.C.-V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Health Sciences Bioethics Committee (protocol code PCSUVM-012023 and 18 August 2023).

Informed Consent Statement

All participants involved in the study signed an informed consent that included information on the purpose of the study, the methods, the advantages of participation, the voluntary involvement, and the researchers’ contact information, and well as consent for the publication.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets that support the findings of this study are not openly available. Data will be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable academic and research use request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Abdel-Khalek, Ahmed M. 2006. Measuring happiness with a single-item scale. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 34: 139–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Aknin, Lara B., Elizabeth W. Dunn, and Michael I. Norton. 2012. Happiness runs in a circular motion: Evidence for a positive feedback loop between prosocial spending and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies 13: 347–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ato, Manuel, Juan J. López-García, and Ana Benavente. 2013. Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología 29: 1038–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bandura, Albert. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bandura, Albert. 2001. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 2: 21–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bandura, Albert. 2018. Toward a psychology of human agency: Pathways and reflections. Perspectives on Psychological Science 13: 130–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Bolier, Linda, Merel Haverman, Gerben J. Westerhof, Heleen Riper, Filip Smit, and Ernst Bohlmeijer. 2013. Positive psychology interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. BMC Public Health 13: 119–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Carr, Alan, Katie Cullen, Cora Keeney, Ciaran Canning, Olwy Mooney, Ellen Chinseallaigh, and Annie O’Dowd. 2020. Effectiveness of positive psychology interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology 16: 749–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cassiani-Miranda, Carlos Arturo, Angy Karina Cuadros-Cruz, Harold Torres-Pinzón, Orlando Scoppetta, Jhon Henrry Pinzón-Tarrazona, Wendy Yulieth López-Fuentes, Andrea Paez, Diego Fernando Cabanzo-Arenas, Sergio Ribero-Marulanda, and Elkin René Llanes-Amaya. 2021. Validez del Cuestionario de salud del paciente-9 (PHQ-9) para cribado de depresión en adultos usuarios de Atención Primaria en Bucaramanga, Colombia. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatría 50: 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Choi, Hyunju, and HaeJin Shin. 2023. Entrapment, hopelessness, and cognitive control: A Moderated Mediation Model of Depression. Healthcare 11: 1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Church, A. Timothy. 2009. Prospects for an integrated trait and cultural psychology. European Journal of Personality 23: 153–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cregg, David R., and Jennifer S. Cheavens. 2022. Healing through helping: An experimental investigation of kindness, social activities, and reappraisal as well-being interventions. The Journal of Positive Psychology 18: 924–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Curry, Oliver Scott, Lee A. Rowland, Caspar J. Van Lissa, Sally Zlotowitz, John McAlaney, and Harvey Whitehouse. 2018. Happy to help? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of performing acts of kindness on the well-being of the actor. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 76: 320–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dai, Hengchen, Silvia Saccardo, Maria A. Han, Lily Roh, Naveen Raja, Sitaram Vangala, Hardikkumar Modi, Shital Pandya, Michael Sloyan, and Daniel M. Croymans. 2021. Behavioural nudges increase COVID-19 vaccinations. Nature 597: 404–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Datu, Jesus Alfonso D., Jana Patricia M. Valdez, Dennis M. McInerney, and Ryan Francis Cayubit. 2022. The effects of gratitude and kindness on life satisfaction, positive emotions, negative emotions, and COVID-19 anxiety: An online pilot experimental study. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being 14: 347–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Díaz-Guerrero, Rogelio. 1995. Una aproximación científica a la etnopsicología. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología 27: 359–89. [Google Scholar]
  17. Díaz-Loving, Rolando. 2019. Ethnopsychology: Pieces from the Mexican Research Gallery. Dordrecht: Springer Nature. [Google Scholar]
  18. Du, Jessica Yu, David John Hallford, and Janie Busby Grant. 2022. Characteristics of episodic future thinking in anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 95: 102162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Ferrando, Pere Joan, and Cristina Anguiano-Carrasco. 2010. El análisis factorial como técnica de investigación en psicología. Papeles del Psicólogo 31: 18–33. [Google Scholar]
  20. Fritz, Catherine O., Peter E. Morris, and Jennifer J. Richler. 2012. Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 141: 2–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hallford, David J., David W. Austin, Keisuke Takano, and Filip Raes. 2018. Psychopathology and episodic future thinking: A systematic review and meta-analysis of specificity and episodic detail. Behaviour Research and Therapy 102: 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Haydon, Marcie D., Lisa C. Walsh, Megan M. Fritz, Danny Rahal, Sonja Lyubomirsky, and Julienne E. Bower. 2022. Kindness interventions for early-stage breast cancer survivors: An online, pilot randomized controlled trial. The Journal of Positive Psychology 18: 743–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hernandez, Rosalba, Brett Burrows, Kenneth Wilund, Michael Cohn, Shuo Xu, and Judith T. Moskowitz. 2018. Feasibility of an Internet-based positive psychological intervention for hemodialysis patients with symptoms of depression. Social Work in Health Care 57: 864–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Huang, Jia, Zhu-Tang Huang, Xin-Ce Sun, Ting-Ting Chen, and Xiao-Tian Wu. 2024. Mental health status and related factors influencing healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 19: e0289454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Huarcaya-Victoria, Jeff, Raúl De-Lama-Morán, María Quiros, Jimena Bazán, Kevin López, and Dáneri Lora. 2020. Propiedades psicométricas del Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) en estudiantes de medicina en Lima, Perú. Revista de Neuro-Psiquiatría 83: 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kerr, Shelley L., Analise O’Donovan, and Christopher A. Pepping. 2015. Can gratitude and kindness interventions enhance well-being in a clinical sample? Journal of Happiness Studies 16: 17–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ko, Kellon, Seth Margolis, Julia Revord, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2019. Comparing the effects of performing and recalling acts of kindness. The Journal of Positive Psychology 16: 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kroenke, Kurt, Robert L. Spitzer, and Janet B. W. Williams. 2001. The PHQ-9. Journal of General Internal Medicine 16: 606–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Lambert, Louise, Holli Anne Passmore, and Mohsen Joshanloo. 2019. A Positive psychology intervention program in a culturally-diverse university: Boosting Happiness and Reducing fear. Journal of Happiness Studies 20: 1141–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lathan, Amanda, and Barbara Dritschel. 2023. Increasing autobiographical memory specificity: Using kindness meditation to impact features of memory retrieval. PLoS ONE 18: e0287007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Layous, Kristin, Hyunjung Lee, and Incheol Choi. 2013. Culture matters when designing a successful happiness-increasing activity: A com-parison of the United States and South Korea. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 44: 1294–1303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Layous, Kristin, Joseph Chancellor, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2014. Positive activities as protective factors against mental health conditions. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 123: 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Lyubomirsky, Sonja, Kennon M. Sheldon, and David Schkade. 2005a. Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change. Review of General Psychology 9: 111–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lyubomirsky, Sonja, Laura King, and Ed Diener. 2005b. The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin 131: 803–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Markus, Hazel Rose, and Shinobu Kitayama. 2003. Culture, Self, and the Reality of the Social. Psychological Inquiry 14: 277–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Maydych, Viktoriya. 2019. The interplay between stress, inflammation, and emotional attention: Relevance for depression. Frontiers in Neuroscience 13: 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Mongrain, Myriam, Caroline Barnes, Ryan Barnhart, and Leah B. Zalan. 2018. Acts of kindness reduce depression in individuals low on agreeableness. Translational Issues in Psychological Science 4: 323–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Moskowitz, Judith T., Elaine O. Cheung, Melanie Freedman, Christa Fernando, Madelynn W. Zhang, Jeff C. Huffman, and Elizabeth L. Addington. 2021. Measuring positive emotion outcomes in positive psychology interventions: A literature review. Emotion Review 13: 60–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Nelson, S. Katherine, Kristin Layous, Steven W. Cole, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2016. Do unto others or treat yourself? The effects of prosocial and self-focused behavior on psychological flourishing. Emotion 16: 850–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Otake, Keiko, Satoshi Shimai, Junko Tanaka-Matsumi, Kanako Otsui, and Barbara L. Fredrickson. 2006. Happy people become happier through kindness: A counting kindnesses intervention. Journal of Happiness Studies 7: 361–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Palacios, Jorge. 2021. Evidencias de validez y confiabilidad de la escala de flexibilidad en jóvenes mexicanos. Persona 24: 27–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Palacios Delgado, Jorge Raúl, and José Marcos Bustos Aguayo. 2012. La teoría como promotor para el desarrollo de intervenciones psicoambientales. Psychosocial Intervention 21: 245–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Palacios, Jorge Raúl, and Rubén Martínez. 2017. Descripción de características de personalidad y dimensiones socioculturales en jóvenes mexicanos. Revista de Psicología 35: 453–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Palacios-Delgado, Jorge, and Fabiola Aimeé Guerrero-Garduño. 2023. A mobile phone intervention to reduce heavy drinking: A preliminary analysis of anchoring heuristics. BMC Psychology 11: 427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Palacios-Delgado, Jorge, and Jessica Noemí Acevedo-Ibarra. 2023. Psychometric properties of a new Mexican optimism scale: Ethnopsychological approach. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education 13: 2747–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Palacios-Delgado, Jorge, Delia Brenda Acosta-Beltrán, and Jessica Noemí Acevedo-Ibarra. 2024. How important are optimism and coping strategies for mental health? Effect in reducing depression in young people. Psychiatry International 5: 532–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Piqueras Rodríguez, José Antonio, Victoriano Ramos Linares, Agustín Ernesto Martínez González, and Luis Armando Oblitas Guadalupe. 2009. Emociones negativas y su impacto en la salud mental y física. Suma Psicológica 16: 85–112. [Google Scholar]
  48. Pressman, Sarah D., Tara L. Kraft, and Marie P. Cross. 2015. It’s good to do good and receive good: The impact of a ‘pay it forward’ style kindness intervention on giver and receiver well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology 10: 293–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Rash, Joshua A., M. Kyle Matsuba, and Kenneth M. Prkachin. 2011. Gratitude and well-being: Who benefits the most from a gratitude intervention? Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being 3: 350–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Robles, Rebeca, and Francisco Páez. 2003. Estudio sobre la traducción al español y las propiedades psicométricas de las escalas de afecto positivo y negativo (PANAS). Salud Mental 26: 69–75. [Google Scholar]
  51. Secretaría de Salud. 2022. 2º Diagnóstico Operativo de Salud Mental y Adicciones. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/730678/SAP-DxSMA-Informe-2022-rev07jun2022.pdf (accessed on 5 November 2024).
  52. Seligman, Martin E. P., and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2000. Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist 55: 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Seligman, Martin E. P., Tayyab Rashid, and Acacia C. Parks. 2006. Positive psychotherapy. American Psychologist 61: 774–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Seligman, Martin E. P., Tracy A. Steen, Nansook Park, and Christopher Peterson. 2005. Positive Psychology Progress: Empirical Validation of Interventions. American Psychologist 60: 410–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Sheldon, Kennon M., and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2006. How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. The Journal of Positive Psychology 1: 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Shin, Lilian J., Kristin Layous, Incheol Choi, Soojung Na, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2019. Good for self or good for others? The well-being benefits of kindness in two cultures depend on how the kindness is framed. The Journal of Positive Psychology 15: 795–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Sin, Nancy L., and Sonja Lyubomirsky. 2009. Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology 65: 467–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Soler-Anguiano, Francisco Leonardo, Sofía Rivera-Aragón, and Rolando Díaz-Loving. 2023. Cross-cultural measurement invariance evidence of individualism and collectivism: From the idiosyncratic to universal. Frontiers in Psychology 14: 1150757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Taylor, Charles T., Sonja Lyubomirsky, and Murray B. Stein. 2017. Upregulating the positive affect system in anxiety and depression: Outcomes of a positive activity intervention. Depression and Anxiety 34: 267–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Thaler, Richard H., Cass R. Sunstein, and John P. Balz. 2013. Choice architecture. In The Behavioral Foundation of Policy. Edited by Eldar Shafir. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 428–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Totzeck, Christina, Tobias Teismann, Stefan G. Hofmann, Ruth von Brachel, Verena Pflug, Andre Wannemüller, and Jürgen Margraf. 2020. Loving-kindness meditation promotes mental health in university students. Mindfulness 11: 1623–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Triandis, Harry C. 2001. Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality 69: 907–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Triandis, Harry C., Gerardo Marín, Judith Lisansky, and Hector Betancourt. 1984. Simpatía as a cultural script of Hispanics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47: 1363–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Voyer, Ben. 2015. ‘Nudging’ behaviours in healthcare: Insights from behavioural economics. British Journal of Healthcare Management 21: 130–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wang, Congxiyu, Eiluned Pearce, Rebecca Jones, and Brynmor Lloyd-Evans. 2022. ‘Kindness by Post’: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation of a Participatory Public Mental Health Project. Frontiers in Psychology 12: 813432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Structure of the kindness intervention.
Table 1. Structure of the kindness intervention.
Activity NumberPositive EventTheoretical Background
1Remember act or expression of kindnessParticipants vividly recalled an action of kindness that someone important in their life had done for them. Memories and instructions for carrying out the activity were based on future episodic thinking (Du et al. 2022; Hallford et al. 2018) and previous studies on kindness (Ko et al. 2019) that report its relevance.
2Write an expression or act of kindnessIndividuals wrote on a white or colored piece of paper the act or expression of kindness they remembered. Field memories often contain the emotions the individual experienced during the original event (Lathan and Dritschel 2023).
3Explain the act or expression of kindnessAfterwards, each participant shared in pairs their previously written kindness action or expression. Instructions for kindness activities towards others and oneself were modeled on previous studies (Cregg and Cheavens 2022; Haydon et al. 2022).
4Schedule act of kindness for yourselfParticipants were instructed that they would perform an activity aimed at strengthening an expression or act of kindness for themselves over the course of the week. Instructions for self-kindness were based on those used in a previous study (Haydon et al. 2022; Wang et al. 2022). To ensure that they performed the act of kindness for themselves, they were instructed to record it on their mobile phone. The activity was based on changes to the choice architecture (Thaler et al. 2013; Voyer 2015), incorporating reminders to increase its execution (Dai et al. 2021; Palacios-Delgado and Guerrero-Garduño 2023).
5Perform an expression or action of kindness towards othersAttendees were asked to perform an action or expression of kindness towards others on or off the university campus. This was based on previous research showing that performing kind acts has more impact than just remembering them (Haydon et al. 2022; Pressman et al. 2015), as well as research indicating that kind acts of cooperation or generosity help improve happiness (Curry et al. 2018). In addition, self-efficacy was considered (Bandura 1997) to increase their capacity to perform kind acts and complemented social cognitive theory (Bandura 2001) to generalize these actions but in new social settings (Bandura 2018; Palacios Delgado and Aguayo 2012).
Table 2. Effect of the intervention based on acts of kindness.
Table 2. Effect of the intervention based on acts of kindness.
Intervention GroupControl Group
Pre-TestPost-TestPre-TestPost-Test
MDEMDEMDEMDE
Acts of kindness5.284.910.511.87.665.95.634.3
Happiness7.071.88.781.46.842.77.232.3
Positive affect15.074.920.213.115.156.115.535.6
Negative affect11.714.96.32.711.15493.8
Depressive symptoms9.355.75.73.99.237.78.928.9
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Palacios-Delgado, J.; Ambriz-Flores, M.; Cruz-Vargas, D.J. The Effectiveness of Kindness Intervention for Promoting Positive Emotions and Reducing Depressive Symptoms in Mexican Adults. Soc. Sci. 2025, 14, 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14020061

AMA Style

Palacios-Delgado J, Ambriz-Flores M, Cruz-Vargas DJ. The Effectiveness of Kindness Intervention for Promoting Positive Emotions and Reducing Depressive Symptoms in Mexican Adults. Social Sciences. 2025; 14(2):61. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14020061

Chicago/Turabian Style

Palacios-Delgado, Jorge, Marcos Ambriz-Flores, and Daniela Judith Cruz-Vargas. 2025. "The Effectiveness of Kindness Intervention for Promoting Positive Emotions and Reducing Depressive Symptoms in Mexican Adults" Social Sciences 14, no. 2: 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14020061

APA Style

Palacios-Delgado, J., Ambriz-Flores, M., & Cruz-Vargas, D. J. (2025). The Effectiveness of Kindness Intervention for Promoting Positive Emotions and Reducing Depressive Symptoms in Mexican Adults. Social Sciences, 14(2), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14020061

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop