Abstract
Low-dose app-based contemplative interventions for mental health are increasingly popular, but heterogeneity in intervention responses indicates that a personalized approach is needed. We examined whether different longitudinal resilience-vulnerability trajectories, derived over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, predicted differences in diverse mental health outcomes after mindfulness and socio-emotional dyadic online interventions. The CovSocial project comprised a longitudinal assessment (phase 1) and an open-label efficacy trial (phase 2). A community sample of 253 participants received 12 min daily app-based socio-emotional dyadic or mindfulness-based interventions, with weekly online coaching for 10 weeks. Before and after the intervention, participants completed validated self-report questionnaires assessing mental health. Stress reactivity profiles were derived from seven repeated assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic (January 2020 to March/April 2021) and were categorized into resilient (more plasticity) or vulnerable (less plasticity) stress recovery profiles. After both interventions, only individuals with resilient stress reactivity profiles showed significant improvements in depression symptomatology, trait anxiety, emotion regulation, and stress recovery. Those with vulnerable profiles did not show significant improvements in any outcome. Limitations of this study include the relatively small sample size and potential biases associated with participant dropout. Brief app-based mental interventions may be more beneficial for those with greater levels of stress resiliency and plasticity in response to stressors. More vulnerable individuals might require more intense and personalized intervention formats.