Current Psychology

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01430-2

The mediating role of openness to experience and curiosity

in the relationship between mindfulness and meaning in life:
evidence from four countries
Chee-Seng Tan 1,2 & Intan Hashimah Mohd Hashim 3 & Kai-Shuen Pheh 1,2 & Chris Pratt 4 & Min-Huey Chung 5 &
Anggi Setyowati 6

Accepted: 28 January 2021

# The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
While mindfulness has been found to increase well-being, the association between mindfulness and meaning in life has received
relatively little attention. The present study examined the hypothetical positive relationship between mindfulness and meaning in
life alongside the mechanism underlying the relationship. Specifically, guided by the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory, a serial
mediation model testing openness to experience and curiosity as the mediators for the connection was proposed. Undergraduate
student participants (N = 1267) from four countries (Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, & Taiwan) responded to a battery of tests
consisting of the Mindful Awareness and Attention Scale, the Big Five Inventory Openness Scale, the Curiosity and Exploration
Inventory-II, and the Meaning in Life scale. Based on a correlation analysis, the four variables were positively correlated with one
another in the whole sample except for the relationship between mindfulness and curiosity. Furthermore, the mediation analysis
supports the positive correlation between mindfulness and the presence of meaning in life indirectly via openness and then
curiosity while controlling search for meaning in life. Such pattern is consistent across the four samples. Overall, the findings
offer cross-cultural evidence on the positive association between mindfulness and meaning in life and shed light on the under-
lying processes. Therefore, mindfulness practices have potential applications in achieving meaningful lives.

Keywords Mindfulness . Well-being . Personality traits . Cross-cultural . Statistical mediation . Young adults

Meaning in life refers to a personal appraisal of the signifi-
cance and purpose of one’s existence. It consists of two sig-
nificant elements: presence of and search for meaning (Steger,
Frazier, Oishi, & Kaler, 2006). Presence of meaning refers to
the perception of one’s life as meaningful while search for
meaning is defined as a tendency to seek the meaning of life.
Studies have shown that people who find meaning from
* Chee-Seng Tan
cstan@outlook.my
1
Department of Psychology and Counselling, Faculty of Arts and
Social Science, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR),
Kampar, Malaysia
2 between mindfulness and meaning in life. They found that
PF-050, FAS UTAR, Jalan Universiti, Bandar Barat, 31900,
Kampar, Perak D.R., Malaysia
3 processing subscale negatively mediates the association be-
Universiti Sains Malaysia, George Town, Malaysia
4
Navitas College of Public Safety, Melbourne, Australia
5
Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
6
Airlangga University, Surabaya, Indonesia
adverse events have a better psychological well-being
(Taylor, Kemeny, Reed, Bower, & Gruenewald, 2000).
Besides, having a meaningful life is positively associated with
a healthy diet and physical activity (Brassai, Piko, & Steger,
2015) while those without a meaningful life are negatively
associated with suicidal ideation (Henry et al., 2014).
Throughout the literature, empirical studies support that
there is a positive association between mindfulness and mean-
ing in life (e.g., Bloch et al., 2017; Chu & Mak, 2019; Jacobs
et al., 2011). However, the underlying mechanism between
the two constructs remains largely unknown. Allan, Bott,
and Suh (2015) examined the mediating role of authenticity
(accounted for by four subscales: awareness, unbiased pro-
cessing, behavior, and relational orientation) in the linkage
the awareness subscale positively mediates while the unbiased
tween the two constructs. Meanwhile the behavior and rela-
tional orientation subscales were not significant mediators.
Similarly, mindfulness was found to have an indirect effect
on purpose in life through decentering (Pearson, Brown,

Bravo, & Witkiewitz, 2015). Although the findings of Allan
et al. (2015) and Pearson et al. (2015) illuminate the underly-
ing processes between mindfulness and meaning in life, it is
necessary to explore other potential mediators to expand the
theoretical development of the literature besides offering a
more comprehensive picture of the relationship (Garland,
Farb, Goldin, & Fredrickson, 2015).
The Relationship between Mindfulness
and Meaning in Life
Mindfulness is characterized by one’s ability to pay attention
to the present moment and accept the experiences without any
judgments (Bishop et al., 2004; Giluk, 2009; Kabat-Zinn,
1990). Studies have consistently found that mindfulness
shows a positive relationship with various human conditions;
from distress tolerance (e.g., Keng, Phang, & Tan, 2015) to
psychological well-being (e.g., Klainin-Yobas et al., 2016) to
forgiveness (Karremans et al., 2020) to altruism (Iwamoto
et al., 2020). Moreover, several mindfulness-based interven-
tion studies have also found that improvement of individuals’
mindfulness level is conducive to meaning in life, particularly
among the clinical population (Bloch et al., 2017; Young,
2016). The meaning-making ability, however, largely de-
pends on one’s awareness of one’s present life experiences
and engagement with activities that are coherent with the
self-identified meaning (McGregor & Little, 1998).
Therefore, mindful people who focus on the present moment
(i.e., high self-awareness) and are flexible in organizing infor-
mation and optimizing behaviors in line with their values are
more likely to appreciate their lives (Young, 2016).
Furthermore, based on the Self-determination Theory,
Ryan, Huta, and Deci (2008) indicated that mindfulness is a
characteristic of an eudaimonic life which is beneficial to the
production of meaning in life. To better explain the beneficial
effects of mindfulness on eudaimonic well-being, Garland
et al. (2015) proposed the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory
(MMT). The MMT asserts that mindfulness increases one’s
flexibility to positively interpret adverse events and derive
new meaning by reappraising those events for personal
growth. Specifically, mindfulness disrupts the default reac-
tions to the adverse or stressful stimulus. Releasing attentional
fixation would then help expand attention and direct aware-
ness to mental and other unnoticed aspects of the stimulus.
Such cognitive broadening not only reframes the stimulus but
also generates psychological distance which is helpful for
interpreting the information with a new and usually positive
lens (Kross & Grossman, 2012). Subsequently, to further sup-
port the notion of MMT, Garland, Hanley, Goldin, and Gross
(2017) reanalyzed longitudinal data derived from a random-
ized control trial study which compared the effect of
mindfulness-based stress reduction and cognitive-behavioral
Curr Psychol
therapy on social anxiety disorder. The researchers found that
attentional control measured at Time 2 (i.e., post-treatment)
predicted decentering measured at Time 3 (3 months after
post-treatment) which was positively associated with broad-
ened awareness measured at Time 4 (6 months after post-
treatment). Moreover, a positive relationship was found be-
tween expanded awareness and reappraisal measured at Time
5 (9 months after post-treatment) and that the latter also pos-
itively predicted positive affect measured at Time 6
(12 months after post-treatment).
The theoretical linkage between mindfulness and meaning
in life has received support from empirical studies (e.g., Allan
et al., 2015; Pearson et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2019). Indeed,
Chu and Mak (2019) conducted a meta-analysis on the asso-
ciation between mindfulness and meaning in life. The re-
searchers found a moderate relationship (r = .37) between
the two constructs based on 22 studies that employed a
cross-sectional design. Moreover, analysis on the nine past
studies that used randomized controlled trials supported that
mindfulness-based interventions can increase meaning in life
and that its positive effect is moderate (Hedge’s g = 0.53).
Based on the theory and empirical evidence mentioned
above, we expect to observe a positive relationship between
mindfulness and meaning in life in the present study.
The Mediating Role of Openness
to Experience
According to MMT, mindfulness promotes well-being by in-
creasing one’s capabilities of discovering the positive sides of
adversities. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that openness
to experience (i.e., a disposition to seek variety and novelty)
may play a constructive role in the linkage between mindful-
ness and well-being. Individuals high in openness to experi-
ence pay more attention and show curiosity about their inner
and outer worlds (Costa & McCrae, 1992). In fact, empirical
evidence supports a positive association between mindfulness
and openness (e.g., Lee & Bowen, 2015; Siegling & Petrides,
2014). For instance, Brown and Ryan (2003) as well as Baer,
Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer, and Toney (2006) found that
everyday mindfulness as measured by the Mindfulness
Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS; Brown & Ryan, 2003)
positively correlated with openness to experience as measured
by the NEO Personality Inventory and the NEO Five-Factor
Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992).
Thompson and Waltz (2007) investigated the association
among the personality traits in the Big Five model, everyday
mindfulness, and mindfulness during meditation. They ad-
ministered the MAAS as well as the Cognitive and Affective
Mindfulness Scale-Revised (CAMS-R; Feldman, Hayes,
Kumar, & Greeson, 2003) to 167 undergraduate students to
measure their everyday mindfulness. Their mindfulness
Curr Psychol
during meditation was then evaluated by the Toronto
Mindfulness Scale (TMS; Lau et al., 2006) after engaging in
a 15-min meditation. Results showed that openness to experi-
ence (as measured by the International Personality Item Pool
[IPIP; Goldberg, 1999]) was positively correlated with the
scores of TMS but not the scores of MAAS and CAM-R. In
other words, people with higher mindfulness during medita-
tion tend to be more open to experiences. Nonetheless, the
researchers explained that the partially inconsistent results
happened possibly due to the difference in measurements.
To reconcile the inconsistent past findings, Giluk (2009) con-
ducted a meta-analysis on the association between the Big
Five model and mindfulness. The analysis on the self-report
of 1993 individuals showed that mindfulness correlates posi-
tively with openness despite the relationship being weaker
than the ones with neuroticism and conscientiousness.
Interestingly, past studies tended to use the overall score of
mindfulness but not the facets of mindfulness in their analy-
ses. To address this inquiry, Hanley (2016) examined the re-
lationship between the five aspects of dispositional mindful-
ness (i.e., observing, describing, acting with awareness, non-
reacting, and non-judging) measured by the Five Facet
Mindfulness Questionnaire and the five personality traits
assessed by the Big Five Inventory. A bivariate correlation
analysis showed that openness was positively associated with
the overall dispositional mindfulness and all of the other facets
except for acting with awareness and non-judging. The canon-
ical correlation analysis, on the other hand, identified five
distinct functions but only three of them were found to be
meaningful in terms of the explained proportion of variance.
Openness was found to have a positive relationship with the
self-awareness cluster which comprised observing and de-
scribing the different facets of mindfulness. Overall, the re-
sults indicate that openness to experience is associated with
overall mindfulness, and this relationship can be further
accounted for by some, but not all, facets of mindfulness.
Moreover, studies have shown that openness to experience
is correlated with meaning in life (e.g., Işik & Üzbe, 2015;
Oishi et al., 2019). Adults who enjoy intellectual activities and
are open to new thoughts and emotions will more likely view
themselves as unique. With more willingness to learn new
things, they are able to search for and find meaning in life
(Işik & Üzbe, 2015). Steger, Kashdan, Sullivan, and Lorentz
(2008) further tested the different pathways of how personal
constructs including personality variables can moderate the
linkage between the presence of meaning and the search for
meaning in life. They found that motivation behind a search
for meaning is likely to influence the outcome. People who
tend to seek new and positive experiences are more likely to
have a healthy search for meaning and thus are likely to find
them. Similarly, using the constrained principal component
analysis to examine the relationship between personality
traits and the dimensions of meaning in life, Lavigne,
Hofman, Ring, Ryder, and Woodward (2013) found that peo-
ple who are high in openness, intellect, and assertiveness tend
to acquire meaning of life using creative methods besides
questioning and learning.
Taken together, the literature suggests that mindful people
tend to be more attentive and open to their surroundings. The
attentiveness and openness are helpful for them to derive
meaning in their lives. This leads us to hypothesize that open-
ness mediates the relationship between mindfulness and
meaning in life.
The Mediating Role of Curiosity
in the Relationship between Mindfulness
and Meaning in Life
Curiosity is strength of character and a positive quality that
relates to the full engagement of self-initiated search for nov-
elty and challenges (Kashdan, Rose, & Fincham, 2004).
Conceptually, one of the components of mindfulness (i.e.,
being non-judgmental) correlates with curiosity (Shapiro &
Carlson, 2009).
Following the notion suggested by Bishop et al. (2004) that
mindfulness is characterized by attentional self-regulation and
orientation to attention, Lau et al. (2006) developed the TMS
to investigate (state) mindfulness acquired from meditation
practices with two dimensions namely curiosity and
decentering. Lau et al. (2006) defined curiosity as the desire
to explore and perceive the present moment naturally, while
decentering emphasizes gaining insight into awareness objec-
tively without relating to oneself. It was found that more ex-
perienced mindfulness practitioners scored higher in both cu-
riosity and decentering than less experienced practitioners
(Lau et al., 2006). In other words, people who can purpose-
fully control their attention through mindfulness practice tend
to have a curious attitude and perceive the experience without
any self-identification.
Similarly, mindfulness trainings have been found to pro-
mote curiosity and other character strengths such as kindness
and vitality (Baer, 2015). The findings not only indicate that
mindfulness meditation practices or trainings promote curios-
ity but also imply that (trait) mindfulness and curiosity are two
related but conceptually distinct constructs.
Principally, curiosity is beneficial to one’s acquisition of
meaning in life which can be part of one’s state of intense
desire to seek novelty and captivating experience here and
now (Kashdan & Steger, 2007). Gallagher and Lopez (2007)
who examined the association between curiosity and well-
being found that the exploration subscale—tendency to seek
novelty and challenges—had a moderate positive correlation
with well-being that is positively associated with meaning in
life (Mascaro & Rosen, 2006). Meanwhile, Kashdan and
Steger (2007) who explored the relationship between

curiosity, meaning in life, and well-being found people with
high levels of curiosity reporting greater meaning in life and
life satisfaction. Similarly, Garrosa, Blanco-Donoso,
Carmona-Cobo, and Moreno-Jiménez (2017) found a positive
relationship between trait curiosity and (trait) presence of
meaning in life among college students. Moreover, they re-
ported that trait curiosity was also positively associated with
the (state) presence of meaning after five consecutive
afternoons.
The empirical findings suggest that people high in mind-
fulness tend to explore unique and challenging experiences.
Their high level of curiosity, in turn, is conducive to achieving
meaningful lives. Therefore, it is hypothesized that curiosity
could be a potential mediator of the mindfulness-meaning in
life linkage.
The Relationship between Openness
to Experience and Curiosity
As reviewed above, both openness to experience and curiosity
are assumed to act as mediators for the linkage between mind-
fulness and meaning in life. Nevertheless, only very few stud-
ies have examined this positive relationship between openness
and curiosity. This research scarcity may be partly due to
personality researchers believing that curiosity is one of the
facets of openness. Woo et al. (2014), for instance, conducted
exploratory factor analysis on 36 scales (Study 1) to examine
and identify the different facets of openness. Their analysis
revealed six factors: ingenuity, intellectual efficiency, aes-
thetics, curiosity, depth, and tolerance. The six aspects can
then all be accounted for by two second-order factors, intellect
and culture, which are further represented by a global open-
ness factor. The hierarchical six-facet structure of openness
was further supported by a confirmatory factor analysis
(Study 2). In other words, global openness as a trait subsumes
curiosity at the lower level, and the two constructs are posi-
tively correlated with each other. The results imply a positive
relationship between openness and curiosity. However, it is
important to note that although curiosity is a subset of open-
ness, researchers (e.g., Jani, 2014; Jeraj, Marič, Todorović,
Čudanov, & Komazec, 2015) treat openness and curiosity as
two conceptually different constructs. For instance, Hunter,
Abraham, Hunter, Goldberg, and Eastwood (2016) found that
openness to experience is a significant predictor of curiosity as
measured by three different scales.
The Present Study
The existing literature suggests that mindful people tend to be
more open to new experiences and have more interests in
exploring the unknown. Moreover, openness is positively
Curr Psychol
associated with curiosity, and both correlated positively with
meaning in life. Therefore, it is believed that openness and
curiosity may positively mediate the linkage between mind-
fulness and meaning in life. In the present study, we defined
mindfulness (as measured by the MAAS) as a tendency to be
attentive to the present moment with a non-judgmental ap-
proach. Openness refers to the readiness to approach variety
and new ideas, while curiosity is defined as a positive attitude
toward new things and the competence of handling the ambi-
guity (Kashdan et al., 2009).
As the hypothesized mediating roles of openness and curi-
osity have not been directly examined before, the present
study aims to bridge the gap by exploring the mechanism
underlying this linkage across four Asia Pacific countries to
understand if the benefits of mindfulness persist in non-
Western countries. Specifically, data were collected from four
countries namely Malaysia, Australia, Taiwan, and Indonesia
based on the availability of co-researchers. According to the
Self-determination Theory (Ryan et al., 2008), fulfilling basic
psychological needs is a fundamental motivation for people.
Hence, we expected to observe a positive relationship between
mindfulness and meaning in life across the four countries. We
also hypothesized three indirect effects: 1) mindfulness to be
associated with meaning in life through openness to experi-
ence, 2) mindfulness to be associated with meaning in life
through curiosity, 3) mindfulness to be correlated with mean-
ing in life through openness to experience and then through
curiosity (i.e., the serial mediating effect). These hypotheses
were tested using a serial mediation model.
Taken together, the present study will expand the literature
by shedding light on the roles of openness to experience and
curiosity in the linkage of mindfulness and meaning in life.
Besides, this study offers cross-cultural evidence on the ben-
eficial role of mindfulness in finding meaning in life.
Method
Participants
This cross-sectional correlational study consisted of 1267 re-
spondents (79.48% females) recruited from four countries (the
details of the samples were reported below). The data were
collected between October 2016 and May 2017 using paper-
and-pencil method and an online questionnaire. The study was
approved by the respective institutional ethical review board
of the researchers together with informed consent obtained
before participants answered the questionnaire consisting of
their demographic information and four measuring scales.
Malaysia The present study recruited 349 undergraduate stu-
dents (271 females) from a public university in Malaysia with
an age range of 20 to 30 years old (M = 22.18, SD = 1.12) but
Curr Psychol
with 11 students not reporting their age. The students who
majored different courses (e.g., chemistry, zoology, music)
were mostly sophomore (48.4%), junior students (36.7%),
freshmen (12.6%), and senior students (2.3%). The sample
consisted of 52.4% Malays, 45.3% Chinese, 0.9% Indians,
and 1.4% other ethnicities. Participants were compensated
with extra course credit.
Australia The sample consisted of 255 Australian undergrad-
uate students (202 females) volunteering in the study. The age
of the participants ranged from 17 to 73 years old (M = 37,
SD = 12.14) with two students not reporting their age. The
students majored in different bachelor-level courses (i.e., psy-
chology, counseling & criminology). Half of the sample were
full-time students (52.50%). The participants, recruited
through their class via Moodle, were encouraged by lecturing
staff in their respective classes to participate in the study. The
participants received no compensation.
Taiwan The present study recruited 411 Taiwanese undergrad-
uate students (370 females) from two universities in Taiwan.
The participants aged between 20 and 28 (M = 21.30, SD =
0.94), each received a token of appreciation (i.e., convenience
store coupon) after completing the online survey.
Indonesia The present study recruited 252 undergraduate stu-
dents (164 females) from two public schools in Java Island
and two Nursing schools in Kalimantan Island using purpo-
sive sampling. The majority of the participants aged between
17 and 26 years old (M = 19.76, SD = 1.90), were full-time
students (96.80%). Most of them majored in Nursing
(85.3%). The students received no compensation.
Measurements
The Malaysian and Australian participants answered the
English version of the following measurements, while the
Taiwanese and Indonesian students responded to the
Mandarin and Bahasa Indonesia versions respectively.
Whenever the translated version was not available (e.g.,
CEI-II), the researchers translated the scales from English to
their local language and then back-translated them into
English. Moreover, the researchers conducted a pilot study
on the translated scales and found good internal consistency
in them. This suggests that the translation has negligible, if
any, negative impact on the perception of the scales.
Moreover, the scales’ Cronbach alpha coefficients of the ac-
tual study were reported in the results section.
Mindful Awareness and Attention Scale (MAAS; Brown &
Ryan, 2003) The present study employed the 15-item MAAS
to measure the extent of awareness and attention to the present
over time. The scale uses a 6-point Likert scale, ranging from
1 (almost always) to 6 (almost never) and included items such
as “I find myself doing things without paying attention” and “I
find myself preoccupied with the future or the past.” A com-
posite score of mindfulness ranging from 1 to 6 was deter-
mined by averaging the responses. Higher ratings indicate
higher degree of mindfulness. The MAAS demonstrated good
internal consistency (Cronbach alpha coefficients > .85) in
both Allan et al.’s (2015) and Pearson et al.’s (2015) studies.
Big Five Inventory Openness Scale (BFI; Benet-Martínez &
John, 1998; John & Srivastava, 1999) The participants
responded to the ten items using a 5-point Likert scale (1:
Strongly disagree; 5: Strongly agree). A mean score was com-
puted by averaging the scores of all the items after reverse
scoring the two items. A higher score indicates a higher level
of openness.
Curiosity and Exploration Inventory-II (CEI-II; Kashdan et al.,
2009) The CEI-II consists of ten items with two factors. The
first factor, stretching, indicates the desire for knowledge and
new experiences. The second factor, embracing, refers to the
willingness to deal with novelty and uncertainty in daily life.
The participants responded to the items on a 5-point Likert
scale ranging from 1 (very slightly or not at all) to 5
(extremely). The score was averaged to obtain a composite
score. A higher composite score represents a higher level of
curiosity.
Meaning in Life (MIL; Steger et al., 2006) The MIL comprises
10 items representing two different constructs of meaning in
life: the presence of meaning and the search for meaning. The
participants indicated responded to the items on a 7-point
Likert scale (1: absolutely untrue; 7: absolutely true). A higher
score means a higher level of meaning in life.
Results
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics for each variable,
intercorrelations, and Cronbach alpha coefficients in the
whole sample and the four respective countries. Normality
of the four target variables was assumed since the absolute
values of skewness and kurtosis were within the value
suggested by Kim (2013) for the given sample size.
Although the normality assumption did not hold for the search
for meaning score of the Indonesian sample, the variable was
treated as a covariate, and the violation is believed to have a
negligible impact on the results.
Overall, the Pearson correlation analysis on the whole sam-
ple showed that the four target variables were significantly
correlated with one another except for the relationship be-
tween mindfulness and curiosity. A similar pattern was also
observed in the four countries but with some differences
 Curr Psychol

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, and Cronbach Alpha Coefficients for Variables

Variables M SD Skewness Kurtosis 1 2 3 4 5

Overall (N=1267) SE=0.07 SE=0.14

1. Mindfulness 4.03 0.72 −0.26 −0.04 (.87)
2. Openness 3.53 0.50 0.07 0.12 .11*** (.75)
3. Curiosity 3.34 0.73 −0.31 −0.03 −.01 .46*** (.89)
4. MIL-P 25.73 5.17 −0.33 −0.08 .21*** .35*** .38*** (.84)
5. MIL-S 26.79 5.57 −1.01 1.65 −.12*** .14*** .25*** .07* (.88)
Malaysia (n =349) SE=0.13 SE=0.26
1. Mindfulness 3.82 0.67 0.06 0.20 (.80)
2. Openness 3.47 0.40 0.16 −0.14 .15** (.64)
3. Curiosity 3.59 0.61 −0.22 −0.07 .13* .49*** (.88)
4. MIL-P 25.83 4.74 −0.21 −0.29 .23*** .33*** .45*** (.82)
5. MIL-S 28.11 3.87 −0.18 −0.49 −.01 .31*** .42*** .39*** (.80)
Australia (n =255) SE=0.15 SE=0.30
1. Mindfulness 3.98 0.75 −0.31 −0.01 (.87)
2. Openness 3.75 0.53 −0.03 −0.46 .23*** (.75)
3. Curiosity 3.29 0.69 −0.25 −0.32 .24*** .46*** (.86)
4. MIL-P 26.51 5.91 −0.59 −0.16 .35*** .23*** .25*** (.90)
5. MIL-S 23.82 7.56 −0.67 −0.32 −.18** .12 .06 −.31*** (.91)
Taiwan (n =411) SE=0.12 SE=0.24
1. Mindfulness 4.28 0.63 −0.60 0.80 (.87)
2. Openness 3.35 0.50 −0.05 0.35 .12* (.79)
3. Curiosity 3.02 0.81 0.14 −0.18 .02 .52*** (.93)
4. MIL-P 23.63 4.53 −0.29 0.64 .31*** .29*** .38*** (.83)
5. MIL-S 25.98 4.24 −0.36 1.15 −.07 .24*** .31*** .23*** (.88)
Indonesia (n =252) SE=0.15 SE=0.31
1. Mindfulness 3.97 0.77 −0.10 −0.27 (.85)
2. Openness 3.66 0.50 0.04 −0.10 .18** (.72)
3. Curiosity 3.54 0.54 −0.06 0.09 −.05 .37*** (.77)
4. MIL-P 28.19 4.59 −0.76 0.69 .28*** .38*** .20** (.75)
5. MIL-S 29.27 5.45 −1.48 2.73 −.09 .10 .05 .03 (.80)

Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; SE = standard error; Mindfulness = Mindful Attention Awareness; Openness = Openness to Experience;
Curiosity = Curiosity and Exploration; MIL-P = Presence of Meaning in Life; MIL-S = Search for Meaning in Life. Cronbach alpha coefficients were
presented in parenthesis on the diagonal line
#
p > .05, *p < .05, **p < .01, **p < .001

found. For example, mindfulness was positively associated
with curiosity in the Malaysian and Australian samples only.
On the other hand, the relationships between search for mean-
ing and the four target variables varied. In the whole sample,
search for meaning was negatively associated with mindful-
ness but positively associated with openness, curiosity, and
presence of meaning. In the individual samples, the search
for meaning did not have a relationship with mindfulness
(Malaysia, Taiwan, & Indonesia), openness (Australia &
Indonesia), curiosity (Australia & Indonesia), and the pres-
ence of meaning (Indonesia).
A serial mediation model (i.e., mindfulness as the predic-
tor, presence of meaning as the outcome variable, openness as
the first-step mediator and curiosity as the second-step medi-
ator, as well as search for meaning in life as the covariate
variable) was proposed and tested. The researchers utilized
PROCESS SPSS macro (Model 6) by Hayes (2013) to exam-
ine the indirect effect of mindfulness on the presence of mean-
ing in life. The study bootstrapped 10,000 samples to create a
95% confidence interval (CI) with bias correction to assess the
significance of the indirect effects.
Analysis on the entire sample showed that both mindful-
ness, B = 0.09, SE = 0.02, t = 4.65, p < .001, 95% CI = [0.05,
0.13] and search for meaning, B = 0.01, SE = 0.003, t = 5.75,
p < .001, 95% CI = [0.01, 0.02] were significantly correlated
with openness. Likewise, openness and search for meaning
Curr Psychol
were found to have a positive relationship with curiosity: B =
0.64, SE = 0.04, t = 17.80, p < .001, 95% CI = [0.57, 0.71]
with openness; B = 0.02, SE = 0.003, t = 7.28, p < .001, 95%
CI = [0.02, 0.03] with search for meaning. However, the asso-
ciation between mindfulness and curiosity was not statistically
significant. On the other hand, openness and curiosity, but not
search for meaning, were significantly associated with pres-
ence of meaning: B = 2.04, SE = 0.28, t = 7.01, p < .001, 95%
CI = [1.47, 2.62] with openness; B = 2.06, SE = 0.20, t =
10.08, p < .001, 95% CI = [1.66, 2.47] with curiosity. The
total effect of mindfulness on presence of meaning (after con-
trolling the effect of search for meaning) was statistically sig-
nificant, B = 1.61, SE = 0.19, t = 8.10, p < .001, 95%
CI = [1.22, 2.00]. Similarly, after controlling the effects of
openness, curiosity and search for meaning, the relationship
between mindfulness and presence of meaning (i.e., direct
effect) remained significant, B = 1.38, SE = 0.18, t = 7.57,
p < .001, 95% CI = [1.02, 1.74] (see Fig. 1).
Using model 6, the study assessed the hypothesized indi-
rect effects and found that the indirect effect of mindfulness on
presence of meaning through openness was statistically sig-
nificant, B = 0.19, SE = 0.05, 95% CI = [0.12, 0.30]. However,
the indirect effect of mindfulness on presence of meaning
through curiosity was not significant, B = −0.08, SE = 0.05,
95% CI = [−0.18, 0.02]. Finally, the indirect effect of mind-
fulness on presence of meaning through openness and then
curiosity (i.e., the serial mediating effect) was significant, B =
0.12, SE = 0.03, 95% CI = [0.07, 0.19]. As two of the three
indirect effects were significant, it is interesting to note the
relative importance between the two indirect effects. The re-
searchers then assessed it using the contrast option in Model 6.
Results showed that the mediating effect of openness was
greater than the serial mediating effect, B = 0.07, SE = 0.04,
95% CI = [0.02, 0.16].
The procedure was later repeated on the responses of the
four countries respectively. Results obtained are similar with
two exceptions. First, the indirect effect of mindfulness on
presence of meaning through curiosity was significant, B =
0.16, SE = 0.09, 95% CI = [0.03, 0.41] for the Australian sam-
ple. Second, the serial mediating effect was not significant for
the Indonesian sample. As most of the Australian sample were
much older than the other three samples, another mediation
analysis was conducted with age being included as another
Openness
0.09***
-0.04
Mindfulness
Fig. 1 Serial mediation model shows the relationship of mindfulness, openness to experience, curiosity, and presence of meaning, with search for
meaning as a covariate (N = 1267). Values shown are unstandardized coefficients. The total effect of mindfulness was shown in parenthesis. ***p < .001
covariate variable. This analysis is helpful to clarify if the
significant mediating effect of curiosity found in the
Australian sample was due to the age differences. The results
were consistent with the findings for the overall sample as
reported above, suggesting that age does not have a significant
impact on the relationships. In addition, the present study that
relied on self-reporting is prone to the common method bias.
To examine the extent of this bias, Harman’s single factor test
was conducted by loading all items into an exploratory factor
analysis. The single factor solution explained 18.67% of the
total variance, thus implying that the impact of the common
method bias is not substantial in the present study.
Discussion
The present study investigated the possible role of openness to
experience and curiosity in the positive linkage between mind-
fulness and meaning in life. Supporting the hypotheses, mind-
fulness was found to have an indirect relationship with mean-
ing in life through openness as well as through openness and
curiosity sequentially.
Moreover, several noteworthy findings were discovered in
the present study. First, the results replicated past findings
(e.g., Bloch et al., 2017) in that mindfulness is beneficial to
meaning in life. The results also lend further support to the
Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory (Garland et al., 2015) and
the Self-determination Theory (Ryan et al., 2008).
Furthermore, the present study extended its focus to the role
of openness to experience and curiosity. Consistent with the
existing literature (e.g., Işik & Üzbe, 2015; Kashdan & Steger,
2007), both openness to experience and curiosity were found
to be positively correlated with the presence of meaning in life
while controlling the effect of the search for meaning in life.
Overall, the present study offers new insights into the un-
derlying mechanism of mindfulness and meaning in life.
While Allan et al. (2015) provided the first evidence to the
indirect effect of mindfulness on meaning in life, the present
study (to our best knowledge) is the first to examine the pos-
sible role of openness and curiosity. More importantly, it is the
first cross-cultural investigation of the association between
mindfulness and meaning in life and the mediating role of
openness as well as curiosity in the relationship. The results
0.64***
Curiosity
2.06***
2.04***
1.38*** (1.61***) Presence of
Meaning in life

support the hypotheses whereby openness was found to me-
diate the linkage of mindfulness and meaning in life. The
finding is thus consistent with previous findings that mindful
people are more open to new experiences (e.g., Baer et al.,
2006; Brown & Ryan, 2003; Giluk, 2009) and that this open-
ness to new experiences is conducive to meaning in life (e.g.,
Işik & Üzbe, 2015; Oishi et al., 2019). Additionally, the find-
ings also broaden the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory by
demonstrating that mindfulness contributes to meaning in life
through openness.
Nevertheless, the same cannot be said for curiosity.
Inspection of the correlation results for the four respective
countries showed that the relationship between mindfulness
and curiosity was positive for Malaysians and Australians but
not for the Taiwanese and Indonesians. Moreover, the medi-
ating effect of curiosity (in the relationship between mindful-
ness and presence of meaning) was only found to be signifi-
cant in the Australian sample. The results indicate that trait
mindfulness may not always be associated with curiosity. Past
studies found that state mindfulness evoked by training/
practice increases curiosity (Baer, 2015; Lau et al., 2006).
On the other hand, our results also demonstrate that trait mind-
fulness has an indirect relationship with curiosity via open-
ness. Taken together, the results suggest a new direction for
the relationship between mindfulness and curiosity. State
mindfulness may contribute to curiosity directly while trait
mindfulness is associated with curiosity indirectly via open-
ness. Future researchers are encouraged to investigate this new
possibility and cultural differences to expand our understand-
ing of the relationship between mindfulness and curiosity.
Finally, consistent with our hypothesis, there was an indi-
rect relationship between mindfulness and presence of mean-
ing through openness and then curiosity in the overall samples
except for the Indonesian sample. The findings not only offer
empirical evidence to the hypothetical serial mediation model
but also lend further support to past findings of the relation-
ship between openness and curiosity (e.g., Hunter et al.,
2016). Moreover, our findings suggest that the relationships
among the variables hold across cultural groups. On the other
hand, inspection of the Indonesian results revealed that the
relationship between curiosity and presence of meaning was
significant in the Pearson correlation but not the mediation
analysis. Moreover, the correlation for the Indonesian sample
was the weakest among the four samples. Future researchers
should explore the possible reasons using measures that have
been validated in the Indonesian context or a qualitative ap-
proach to understand the locals’ perception about the role of
curiosity in finding life meaning.
Limitations
Despite the success of the current study, caution is needed
when interpreting its findings due to some drawbacks. First,
Curr Psychol
the influence of state mindfulness was overlooked. The pres-
ent study used the MAAS to measure everyday mindfulness
as a trait. Thompson and Waltz (2007) indicated that “mind-
fulness during meditation may be a form of state mindfulness
that is not representative of the more trait mindfulness found
in everyday mindfulness” (p. 183). Moreover, the MAAS is a
unidimensional measure of the tendency to be attentive to the
present moment and hence may not be able to comprehensive-
ly capture the concept of mindfulness. Therefore, researchers
in future studies are encouraged to use meditation or mindful
practices and other measures that take into account different
facets of mindfulness such as the Five Facet Mindfulness
Questionnaire (FFMQ; Baer et al., 2006) to replicate the pres-
ent study, especially the effect of mindfulness on curiosity. In
the same vein, our definition of openness to experience is
somewhat different from Costa and McCrae’s (1992). While
we define openness as a capacity to appreciate the positive
side of variety and new ideas in the present study, Costa and
McCrae’s definition is more comprehensive that not only fo-
cuses on the capacities but also behavioral patterns and moti-
vation for seeking novelty. Researchers are reminded to take
caution of the differences and further clarify the definitions of
openness in mindfulness practice. Moreover, future re-
searchers may revise the instructions of the openness scale
(Golomb-Leavitt, 2015) and/or employ the Five-
Dimensional Curiosity Scale Revised (Kashdan, Disabato,
Goodman, & McKnight, 2020) to better capture the state of
openness and curiosity respectively, and further distinguish
them from mindfulness.
Besides, the present study employed a narrow focus on the
role of openness and curiosity. It is thus pivotal and exciting to
further examine concurrently the role of openness, curiosity,
and authenticity to have a more comprehensive understand-
ing. In a similar vein, it is necessary to expand the scope of the
investigation to other potential variables. For instance, there is
empirical evidence showing that mindfulness, openness, and
curiosity are conducive to creativity (e.g., Hagtvedt,
Dossinger, Harrison, & Huang, 2019; Henriksen,
Richardson, & Shack, 2020; Tan, Lau, Kung, & Kailsan,
2019), which has also been found to have a positive relation-
ship with meaning in life (e.g., Tan, Nainee, Tan, & Viapude,
2017). In the same vein, the Mindfulness-to-Meaning Theory
(Garland et al., 2015) speculates that mindfulness promotes
meaning in life through cognitive flexibility and reappraisal.
Future researchers may consider investigating the mediating
role of creativity, cognitive flexibility, and reappraisal to fur-
ther enhance our understanding of the positive role of mind-
fulness in the search for a meaningful life.
Furthermore, the relationship between openness and curi-
osity can be bidirectional. However, it is more appropriate to
consider the path from openness to experience to curiosity
than vice versa. The reason is that curiosity is but one facet
of the global trait of openness (Woo et al., 2014). To put this
Curr Psychol
differently, individuals with high openness to experience tend
to embrace both intellectual stimuli (e.g., new scientific find-
ings) and experiential stimuli (e.g., learning different skills),
whereas people high in curiosity might merely like a form of
novel intellectual stimulations but avoid the new ways of do-
ing things.
It is also important to note that the translated measurements
did not go through a proper validation process. Likewise,
measurement invariance was not conducted to ensure that
the used measurements are assessing the same constructs
across the four samples. Although a comprehensive examina-
tion of psychometric properties of the applied measurements
is beyond the scope of the present research, efforts had been
taken to safeguard qualities of the measurements. For in-
stance, the researchers conducted pilot studies on the translat-
ed scales and found them to be acceptable and have good
internal consistency. All other measurements used in the pres-
ent study also showed good internal consistency. Moreover,
consistent with past findings, the variables were found to cor-
relate with one another in the theoretical sense, offering sup-
port to the validity of the measurements. However, studies on
validation and measurement equivalence are warranted to en-
sure that the measurements are appropriate for the different
cultural groups. The results of the studies may also help to
explain whether or not the insignificant serial mediating effect
found in the Indonesian sample was due to the translated
measurements.
Finally, the present study used a cross-sectional design
where the relationships shall not be interpreted with the lens
of causality. Therefore, future researchers may consider using
an experimental design or longitudinal design to distinguish
and investigate the effect of state and trait mindfulness on
meaning in life along with their underlying mechanisms.
Implications
Theoretically speaking, the results have extended knowledge
and enhanced our understanding that everyday mindfulness
contributes to a meaningful life indirectly through openness
as well as through openness to experience and then curiosity.
The latter (i.e., the serial mediating effect) clarifies the positive
relationship of the three variables (i.e., mindfulness, openness
to experience & curiosity) with meaning in life by offering
empirical support to one of the theoretical models.
Practically speaking, the findings highlighted the impor-
tance of providing a channel for young adults to explore
new experiences and seek novelty in maximizing the benefits
of mindfulness in their search for meaningful lives. In other
words, although mindfulness is conducive to the presence of
meaning in life, the positive effect may be reduced if mindful
individuals are refrained from being attentive to new experi-
ences or seeking novelty.
Finally, the present study has lent additional support to the
beneficial role of mindfulness in acquiring meaning in life.
More importantly, positive relationships are observed across
the four countries. The cross-cultural similarities indicate that
mindfulness is useful for people from different cultures in
universally attaining meaningful lives.
Data Availability The datasets generated during and/or analysed during
the current study are available from the corresponding author on reason-
able request.
Declarations
Ethical Approval All procedures performed in studies involving human
participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the respec-
tive institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964
Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical
standards.
Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all individual
participants included in the study.
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
Allan, B. A., Bott, E. M., & Suh, H. (2015). Connecting mindfulness and
meaning in life: Exploring the role of authenticity. Mindfulness, 6,
996–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-014-0341-z.
Baer, R. (2015). Ethics, values, virtues, and character strengths in
mindfulness-based interventions: A psychological science perspec-
tive. Mindfulness, 6, 956–969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-015-
0419-2.
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L.
(2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of
mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1073191105283504.
Benet-Martínez, V., & John, O. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cul-
tures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of the big
five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 75, 729–750. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.
3.729.
Bishop, S., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N., Carmody, J.,
et al. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed operational definition.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11, 230–241. https://
doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bph077.
Bloch, J. H., Farrell, J. E., Hook, J. N., Van Tongeren, D. R., Penberthy, J.
K., & Davis, D. E. (2017). The effectiveness of a mediation course
on mindfulness and meaning in life. Spirituality in Clinical Practice,
4, 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/scp0000119.
Brassai, L., Piko, B. F., & Steger, M. F. (2015). A reason to stay healthy:
The role of meaning in life in relation to physical activity and
healthy eating among adolescents. Journal of Health Psychology,
20, 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105315576604.
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present:
Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822–848. https://doi.org/
10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822.
Chu, S. T. W., & Mak, W. W. (2019). How mindfulness enhances mean-
ing in life: A meta-analysis of correlational studies and randomized

controlled trials. Mindfulness, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12671-019-01258-9.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model of person-
ality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of
Personality Disorders, 6, 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.
1992.6.4.343.
Feldman, G. C., Hayes, A. M., Kumar, S. M., Greeson, J. M. (2003).
Clarifying the construct of mindfulness: Relations with emotional
avoidance, over-engagement, and change with mindfulness training.
Paper presented at the Association for the Advancement of behavior
therapy, Boston, MA.
Gallagher, M. W., & Lopez, S. J. (2007). Curiosity and well-being. The
Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, 236–248. https://doi.org/10.
1080/17439760701552345.
Garland, E. L., Farb, N. A., Goldin, P. R., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2015).
Mindfulness broadens awareness and builds eudaimonic meaning:
A process model of mindful positive emotion regulation.
Psychological Inquiry, 26, 293–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1047840X.2015.1064294.
Garland, E. L., Hanley, A. W., Goldin, P. R., & Gross, J. J. (2017).
Testing the mindfulness-to-meaning theory: Evidence for mindful
positive emotion regulation from a reanalysis of longitudinal data.
PLoS ONE, 12(12). Article ID e0187727.
Garrosa, E., Blanco-Donoso, L. M., Carmona-Cobo, I., & Moreno-
Jiménez, B. (2017). How do curiosity, meaning in life, and search
for meaning predict college students’ daily emotional exhaustion
and engagement? Journal of Happiness Studies, 18, 17–40. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9715-3.
Giluk, T. L. (2009). Mindfulness, big five personality, and affect: A meta-
analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 805–811.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.06.026.
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality
inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor
models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruty, & F. Ostendorf
(Eds.), Personality Psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28).
Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
Golomb-Leavitt, A. (2015). Expanding 0penness: The effect of actor
emotional expression on audience openness to experience.
Syracuse University Honors Program Capstone Projects. 862.
https://surface.syr.edu/honors_capstone/862
Hagtvedt, L. P., Dossinger, K., Harrison, S. H., & Huang, L. (2019).
Curiosity made the cat more creative: Specific curiosity as a driver
of creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 150, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.10.007.
Hanley, A. W. (2016). The mindful personality: Associations between
dispositional mindfulness and the five factor model of personality.
Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 154–158. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.11.054.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and condi-
tional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York:
The Guilford Press.
Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Shack, K. (2020). Mindfulness and
creativity: Implications for thinking and learning. Thinking Skills
and Creativity, 37, 100689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.
100689.
Henry, K. L., Lovegrove, P. J., Steger, M., Chen, P. Y., Cigularov, K., &
Tomazic, R. G. (2014). The potential role of meaning in life in the
relationship between bullying victimization and suicidal ideation.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 221–232. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10964-013-9960-210.
Hunter, J. A., Abraham, E. H., Hunter, A. G., Goldberg, L. C., &
Eastwood, J. D. (2016). Personality and boredom proneness in the
prediction of creativity and curiosity. Thinking Skills and Creativity,
22, 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.08.002.
Işik, S., & Üzbe, N. (2015). Personality traits and positive / negative
affect: An analysis of meaning in life among adults. Educational
Curr Psychol
Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15, 587–595. https://doi.org/10.
12738/estp.2015.3.2436.
Iwamoto, S. K., Alexander, M., Torres, M., Irwin, M. R., Christakis, N.
A., & Nishi, A. (2020). Mindfulness meditation activates altruism.
Scientific Reports, 10, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-
62652-1.
Jacobs, T. L., Epel, E. S., Lin, J., Blackburn, E. H., Wolkowitz, O. M.,
Bridwell, D. A., et al. (2011). Intensive mindfulness training, im-
mune cells telomerase activity and psychological mediators.
Psychoneurendocrinology, 36, 664–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
psyneuen.2010.09.010.
Jani, D. (2014). Big five personality factors and travel curiosity: Are they
related? Anatolia, 25(3), 444–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13032917.2014.909366.
Jeraj, M., Marič, M., Todorović, I., Čudanov, M., & Komazec, S. (2015).
The role of openness and entrepreneurial curiosity in Company's
growth. Amfiteatru Economic Journal, 17(38), 371–389 http://hdl.
handle.net/10419/168922.
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The big-five trait taxonomy: History,
measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P.
John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2,
pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: How to cope with stress,
pain and illness using mindful meditation. New York: Bantam Dell.
Karremans, J. C., van Schie, H. T., van Dongen, I., Kappen, G., Mori, G.,
van As, S., ten Bokkel, I. M., & van der Wal, R. C. (2020). Is
mindfulness associated with interpersonal forgiveness? Emotion,
20(2), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000552.
Kashdan, T. B., Disabato, D. J., Goodman, F. R., & McKnight, P. E.
(2020). The five-dimensional curiosity scale revised (5DCR):
Briefer subscales while separating overt and covert social curiosity.
Personality and Individual Differences, 157, 109836. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109836.
Kashdan, T. B., Gallagher, M. W., Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Breen,
W. E., Terhar, D., & Steger, M. F. (2009). The curiosity and explo-
ration inventory-II: Development, factor structure, and psychomet-
rics. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 987–998. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jrp.2009.04.011.
Kashdan, T. B., Rose, P., & Fincham, F. D. (2004). Curiosity and explo-
ration: Facilitating positive subjective experiences and personal
growth opportunities. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 291–
305. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8203_05.
Kashdan, T. B., & Steger, M. F. (2007). Curiosity and pathways to well-
being and meaning in life: Traits, states, and everyday behaviors.
Motivation and Emotion, 31, 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11031-007-9068-7.
Keng, S. L., Phang, C. K., & Tan, P. O. (2015). Effects of a brief
mindfulness-based intervention program on psychological symp-
toms and well-being among medical students in Malaysia: A con-
trolled study. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 8, 335–
350.
Kim, H. Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing
normal distribution using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative
Dentistry Endodontics, 38, 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.
2013.38.1.52.
Klainin-Yobas, P., Ramirez, D., Fernandez, Z., Sarmiento, J., Thanoi, W.,
Ignacio, J., & Lau, Y. (2016). Examining the predicting effect of
mindfulness on psychological well-being among undergraduate stu-
dents: A structural equation modeling approach. Personality and
Individual Differences, 91, 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.
2015.11.034.
Kross, E., & Grossman, I. (2012). Boosting wisdom: Distance from the
self enhances wise reasoning, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 43–48. https://doi.org/10.
1037/a0024158.
Curr Psychol
Lau, M. A., Bishop, S. R., Segal, Z. V., Buis, T., Anderson, N. D.,
Carlson, L., Shapiro, S., Carmody, J., Abbey, S., & Devins, G.
(2006). The Toronto mindfulness scale: Development and valida-
tion. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 1445–1467. https://doi.
org/10.1002/jclp.20326.
Lavigne, K. M., Hofman, S., Ring, A. J., Ryder, A. G., & Woodward, T.
S. (2013). The personality of meaning in life: Associations between
dimensions of life meaning and the big five. The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 8, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2012.
736527.
Lee, K. H., & Bowen, S. (2015). Relation between personality traits and
mindfulness following mindfulness-based training: A study of in-
carcerated individuals with drug abuse disorders in Taiwan.
International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 13, 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-014-9533-y.
Mascaro, N., & Rosen, D. H. (2006). The role of existential meaning as a
buffer against stress. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 46, 168–
190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167805283779.
McGregor, I., & Little, B. R. (1998). Personal projects, happiness, and
meaning: On doing well and being yourself. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 74, 44–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.74.2.494.
Oishi, S., Choi, H., Buttrick, N., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K.,
Westgate, E. C., Tucker, J., Ebersole, C. R., Axt, J., Gilbert, E.,
Ng, B. W., & Besser, L. L. (2019). The psychologically rich life
questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 81, 257–270.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.06.010.
Pearson, M. R., Brown, D. B., Bravo, A. J., & Witkiewitz, K. (2015).
Staying in the moment and finding purpose: The associations of trait
mindfulness, decentering, and purpose in life with depressive symp-
toms, anxiety symptoms, and alcohol-related problems.
Mindfulness, 6(3), 645–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-014-
0300-8.
Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Living well: A self-
determination theory perspective of eudaimonia. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 9, 139–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-
006-9023-4.
Shapiro, S. L., & Carlson, L. E. (2009). The art and science of mindful-
ness: Integrating mindfulness into psychology and the helping pro-
fessions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
Publications. https://doi.org/10.1037/11885-000
Siegling, A. B., & Petrides, K. V. (2014). Measures of trait mindfulness:
Convergent validity, shared dimensionality, and linkages to the five-
factor model. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.
3389/fpsyg.2014.01164.
Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The meaning in
life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning
in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 80–93. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80.
Steger, M. F., Kashdan, T. B., Sullivan, B. A., & Lorentz, D. (2008).
Understanding the search for meaning in life: Personality, cognitive
style, and the dynamic between seeking and experiencing meaning.
Journal of Personality, 76, 199–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.
1467-6494.2007.00484.
Tan, C. S., Lau, X. S., Kung, Y. T., & Kailsan, R. (2019). Openness to
experience enhances creativity: The mediating role of intrinsic mo-
tivation and the creative process engagement. Journal of Creative
Behavior, 53, 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.170.
Tan, C. S., Nainee, S., Tan, S. A., & Viapude, G. N. (2017, October).
Self-rated creativity relieves death anxiety: The mediating role of
meaning in life. Paper presented at the National Conference on cre-
ativity in education and humanities, Penang, Malaysia.
Taylor, S. E., Kemeny, M. E., Reed, G. M., Bower, J. E., & Gruenewald,
T. L. (2000). Psychological resources, positive illusions, and health.
American Psychologist, 55, 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.55.1.99.
Thompson, B. L., & Waltz, J. (2007). Everyday mindfulness and mind-
fulness meditation: Overlapping constructs or not? Personality and
Individual Differences, 43, 1875–1885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2007.06.017.
Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Longley, A., Zhang, Z. X., Chiu, C. Y.,
& Stark, S. E. (2014). Openness to experience: Its lower level struc-
ture, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 96, 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00223891.2013.806328.
Yang, X., Fan, C., Liu, Q., Lian, S., Cao, M., & Zhou, Z. (2019). The
mediating role of boredom proneness and the moderating role of
meaning in life in the relationship between mindfulness and depres-
sive symptoms. Current Psychology. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00408-5.
Young, T. (2016). Additional mechanisms of mindfulness: How does
mindfulness increase well-being? In I. Ivtzan & T. Lomas (Eds.),
Mindfulness in positive psychology: The science of meditation and
wellbeing (pp. 156–172). New York: Routledge.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.