AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (657.4 KB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Medical Psychology | Publishing Language: Chinese | Open Access

Positive event training combined with homework assignments more sustainably improves mental health in college students: a randomized controlled trial

Peipei LI1,2Qian YANG2Yangxin HUANG1Min LI2( )
Department of Psychology, School of Marxism, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan, Hubei
Department of Military Psychology, College of Medical Psychology, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China

LI Peipei and YANG Qian contributed equally to this article.

Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

Autobiographical memory and episodic future thinking are pivotal to psychological well-being. To explore the application of integrated training of these 2 components in school mental health education, this study aims to evaluate the effects of a group psychological training program involving recalling and anticipating positive events on mental health in college students.

Methods

A total of 79 college students were voluntarily enrolled through verbal announcements posted by the mental health center of a university. After pre-enrollment interviews, 75 students who met the inclusion criteria provided informed consent and participated in this study. Using a stratified randomization method based on gender, the participants were assigned into a training group (n=25), a training-plus-homework group (n=25), and a waitlist group (n=25). Both the training group and the training-plus-homework group received group psychological training for positive events for 6 consecutive days, with one session (120 min) per day, and the training-plushomework group was additionally required to complete homework assignment once per week, for 4 weeks after training. The waitlist group received no psychological training during the intervention period. All 3 groups were assessed before training, after training, and 30 d after training using Psychological Richness Questionnaire, Satisfaction with Life Scale, and Chinese Simplified Version of the Depression-Anxiety-Stress Scale to evaluate psychological richness, life satisfaction, and psychological distress, respectively.

Results

Since 6 participants dropped out during the study, there were finally 69 participants (training group: n=22; training-plus-homework group: n=23; waitlist group: n=24). Statistical analysis indicated no serious common method bias in this study. Further analyses revealed that: ① There were no significant differences among the 3 groups in demographic variables or baseline scores of psychological richness, life satisfaction, and depression-anxiety-stress; ② Psychological richness scores showed significant effects for time (F=32.036, P<0.001, partial η2=0.327), group (F=4.425, P=0.016, partial η2=0.118), and time×group interaction (F=15.324, P<0.001, partial η2=0.317). Simple effect analyses revealed significant within-group differences (training group: F=20.339, P<0.001, partial η2=0.385; training-plus-homework group: F=34.912, P<0.001, partial η2=0.518) and between-group differences (post-intervention: F=6.710, P=0.002, partial η2=0.169; 30 d after intervention: F=10.394, P<0.001, partial η2=0.240). After intervention, both the training group and the training-plus-homework group had higher psychological richness scores than the waitlist group (P=0.007, P=0.008). At 30 d after intervention, the training-plus-homework group had higher psychological richness scores than both the training group and the waitlist group (P=0.042, P<0.001). The training group scored significantly higher after intervention than at baseline and at 30 d after intervention (P<0.001, P=0.002). The training-plus-homework group showed significantly higher scores after training than at baseline (P<0.001), and higher scores at 30 d after training than both after training and at baseline (P=0.011, P<0.001); ③ for life satisfaction, the main effect of time (F=3.379, P=0.039, partial η2=0.049) and the time×group interaction effect (F=3.799, P=0.006, partial η2 =0.103) were significant. Simple effect analysis showed significant within-group differences in the training-plus-homework group (F=8.454, P<0.001, partial η2=0.206) and significant between-group differences at 30 d after training (F=6.076, P=0.004, partial η2=0.156). The training-plus-homework group had higher scores at 30 d after training than both the training group and the waitlist group (P=0.036, P=0.004), and higher scores than those of the same group after training and at baseline (P=0.045, P<0.001); ④ there were no significant within-group or between-group differences in depression-anxiety-stress scores among the 3 groups at the 3 time points (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Group psychological training involving recall and anticipation of positive events combined with homework demonstrates more pronounced effects in enhancing positive mental health levels in college students.

CLC number: G645.5; R395.1; R395.6 Document code: A

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Journal of Army Medical University
Pages 1465-1473

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
LI P, YANG Q, HUANG Y, et al. Positive event training combined with homework assignments more sustainably improves mental health in college students: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Army Medical University, 2026, 48(10): 1465-1473. https://doi.org/10.16016/j.2097-0927.202507042

117

Views

4

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

CSCD

Received: 12 July 2025
Revised: 19 January 2026
Published: 30 May 2026
© 2026 Journal of Army Medical University

This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).