Stay Positive: The Effects of Positive Affect Journaling on Emotion When Remembering COVID-19

ABSTRACT

Positive affect journaling (PAJ) encourages individuals to focus on positive aspects of life experiences. To test its efficaciousness on hedonic well-being, college students (N=119) were asked to remember transitions during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in one of three conditions: (i) positive affect journaling (PAJ), in which participants were instructed to journal about positive changes, (ii) control journaling, in which participants were asked to journal about any changes, or (iii) a no journaling condition. Emotional outcomes were explicitly and more subtly assessed after only thinking about the COVID-19 transition period and after journaling about it. Those in the PAJ condition had enhanced positive emotion compared to those in the control journaling condition after only thinking about the COVID-19 transition period. However, even when controlling for this difference in reflection, PAJ continued to be efficacious on a more subtle indicator of positive emotional well-being. Implications for integrating PAJ with clinical interventions are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Positive affect journaling
• emotional expression
• COVID-19
• mental health
• well-being
• positive psychology
• creativity in counseling

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Initially, a total of 154 young adults participated. Data for two participants was excluded for exceeding the age limit, data for 11 participants was excluded for not completing the survey, and data for 20 participants was excluded for not completing the journaling manipulation in the survey (PAJ condition n = 7; control journaling condition n = 13).

2. Partial eta-squared (η_p²) interpreted as: small = .10, medium = .25, and large = .40 effect sizes.

3. Additional questions included in the study but not analyzed here were about the overall value and positive and negative effects of the experiment for participants, and the likelihood they would continue to journal.

4. Cohen’s d interpreted as: small = .20, medium = .50, and large = .80 effect sizes.

Additional information

Funding

The first author was awarded an Undergraduate Research and Creative Activities Grant (URCA #3871) from the University of California Santa Barbara to fund this work. Data is available upon request.