Through the windows of the soul: A pilot study using photography to enhance meaning in life

Abstract

A pilot study is presented using a photographic method for participants to explore where meaning in their lives comes from. Eighty-six university students were instructed to take 9-12 photographs of "things that make your life feel meaningful." One week later, participants returned, viewed, and described their photographs. Significant within-person improvements in levels of meaning in life, life satisfaction, and positive affect were observed following the intervention. •Meaning in life is important to clinical populations and therapeutic practices.•Participants took photographs of "things that make your life feel meaningful."•Meaning, life satisfaction, and positive affect increased following intervention.

Full text

Through the windows of the soul: A pilot study using photography
to enhance meaning in life
Michael F. Steger
a,b,
n
, Yerin Shim
a
, Jennifer Barenz
a
, Joo Yeon Shin
a
a
Colorado State University, USA
b
North-West University, South Africa
article info
Article history:
Received 1 February 2013
Received in revised form
13 September 2013
Accepted 8 November 2013
Keywords:
Meaning in life
Purpose in life
Autophotography
Positive psychology intervention
abstract
A pilot study is presented using a photographic method for participants to explore where meaning in
their lives comes from. Eighty-six university students were instructed to take 9–12 photographs of
“things that make your life feel meaningful.”One week later, participants returned, viewed, and
described their photographs. Significant within-person improvements in levels of meaning in life, life
satisfaction, and positive affect were observed following the intervention.
&2013 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association for Contextual Behavioral Science.
1. Introduction
One of the central goals of psychotherapeutic approaches such
as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is to help clients
live more authentically, in touch with and acting according to their
identity and values (e.g., Hayes & Strohsal, 2010). ACT provides
practitioners with a range of tools to facilitate self-understanding,
values clarity, and purposeful activity (e.g., Luoma, Hayes, &
Walser, 2007). In the present report, we describe results from a
pilot study for a novel intervention that pursues similar aims by
targeting meaning in life.
Among therapeutic modalities, ACT provides a natural context
for exploring and utilizing meaning in life for clinical improvement
(Steger, Sheline, Merriman, & Kashdan, 2013). Meaning in life has
been defined as the sense people make of their existence and the
overarching life purposes they pursue (e.g., Steger, 2009). Meaning
in life theory emphasizes helping people discover what truly
matters to them and flexibly pursue their life aims and aspirations
(e.g., Kashdan & McKnight, 2009;King, Hicks, Krull, & Del Gaiso,
2006;Park & Folkman, 1997;Steger, 2009,2012). For these
reasons, psychologists long have argued that meaning in life is a
critical component of human well-being (e.g., Ryff, 1989). Accord-
ingly, research has established links between meaning in life and
better functioning in nearly every domain of life (for review, see
Steger, 2009,2012). A small but growing research literature has
demonstrated the relevance of meaning in life to clinical phenom-
ena, including lower levels of psychopathology and better
response to therapy (Debats, 1996), lower levels of fear, anxiety
and depression (Steger, Mann, Michels, & Cooper, 2009;Steger &
Kashdan, 2009) and less suicidal ideation (Harlow, Newcomb, &
Bentler, 1986), as well as posttraumatic stress and experiential
avoidance (Kashdan, Kane, & Kecmanovic, 2011). Additionally,
research has suggested that people are able to draw on their sense
of life's meaning to help them cope with traumatic life events
(Triplett, Tedeschi, Cann, Calhoun, & Reeve, 2012).
Unfortunately, little research attention has been paid to the
question of how to cultivate meaning, particularly in clinical
contexts. Some meaning-cultivation programs have been
described in the literature: Meaning-Centered Group Psychother-
apy (MCGP; Greenstein & Breitbart, 2000), the Meaning-Making
intervention (MMi; Lee, Cohen, Edgar, Laizner, & Gagnon, 2006)
and meaning-centered counseling and therapy (MCCT; Wong,
1999). These efforts seek to help people find meaning through
understanding what is important to them and mobilize meaning
as a coping resource. Although encouraging results have been
reported for the MMi (Lee et al., 2006), data on other interventions
is scarce.
We sought to develop a simple intervention that could be
incorporated into therapeutic approaches like ACT and would
enable people to intuitively explore meaning in their lives. This
intervention draws on a method called auto-photography, which is
a visual research method widely used in ethnographic field
research that aims to “see the world through someone else's eyes”
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jcbs
Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science
2212-1447/$ - see front matter &2013 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of Association for Contextual Behavioral Science.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2013.11.002
n
Corresponding author at: Department of Psychology, Colorado State University,
Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA. Tel.: þ1 197 491 7324.
E-mail address: michael.f.steger@colostate.edu (M.F. Steger).
Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 3 (2014) 27–30

(Thomas, 2009, p. 244). This method allows participants to clearly
represent their own perspectives, and has been widely used in self
and identity research (Dollinger & Clancy, 1993;Noland, 2006;
Ziller & Lewis, 1981). In this report, we describe a pilot study using
an adaptation of autophotography to enhance meaning.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Eighty-six psychology major undergraduate students were
recruited from a research pool at a large, Western university in the
United States. A qualitative report using this sample has been
published previously, though there is no overlap with the data
reported here (Steger, Shim, Brueske, Rush, Shin, & Merriman,
2013). One participant did not complete Time 2 activities, leaving
85 total participants (age M¼19.3 year s ; SD¼1.9 years; 73.8% female,
and 83.3% European–American).
2.2. Procedure
Participants completed a battery of questionnaires (Global
Questionnaire) at Time 1 and were given a Kodak digital camera
with 8.2 megapixel resolution. They were instructed to take
photographs of “things that make your life feel meaningful.”The
camera's built-in memory set a limit of 9–12 photographs. One
week later, at Time 2, photos were downloaded from the camera
and participants completed a brief survey (State Survey). Partici-
pants were then asked to write a response to the prompt “What
does this photo represent, and why is it meaningful?”. Finally,
they completed duplicate forms of the State Survey and Global
Questionnaire.
2.3. Measures
2.3.1. Global Questionnaire
The Global Questionnaire consisted of four widely-used and
psychometrically sound instruments used to examine change in
meaning in life, life satisfaction, and symptoms of depression,
anxiety and stress. Scores from the Global Questionnaire showed
good reliability (Table 1).
2.3.1.1. Meaning in life. The Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ;
Steger, Frazier, Oishi, & Kaler, 2006) consists of two 5-item
subscales measuring the Presence of Meaning (MLQ-P) and the
Search for Meaning (MLQ-S), with items rated from 1 (absolutely
untrue)to7(absolutely true).
2.3.1.2. Life satisfaction. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS;
Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) is a 5-item scale, with
items rated from 1 (strongly disagree)to7(strongly agree).
2.3.1.3. Psychological distress. The Depression Anxiety and Stress
Scale (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) consists of three
subscales—depression, anxiety, and stress—each assessed using
7 items rated from 0 (did not apply to me at all)to3(applied to me
very much, or most of the time). For this study, one item in the
depression subscale that measures meaning in life was deleted to
reduce the chances that the intervention would falsely influence
depression because of that item.
2.3.2. State Survey
To measure state levels of meaning in life, life satisfaction, and
positive and negative affect, the State Survey was created based on
items from the MLQ, the SWLS, and a popular measure of positive
and negative affect (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). MLQ items
were supplemented with items drawn from meaning in life theory
(Steger, 2009), intended to assess comprehension and purpose.
Each item presented with a unique rating scale with 100 dots, with
a vertical slash after every 10 dots. Participants were asked to put
an X on the scale where it best reflected how they felt “at this
moment”scale of 0 (not at all [_____], or no [_____] at all) to 100
(as [_____] as anyone could ever be, complete and total [_____], or
absolutely [_____]). Scores from the State Survey had good relia-
bility (Table 2).
2.3.2.1. Positive affect and negative affect. State positive affect was
measured using five adjective: happy, strong, excited, enthusiastic,
and relaxed drawn from an existing measure (Watson et al., 1988).
State negative affect was measured using seven items: sad,
nervous, distressed, irritable, guilty, afraid, and stressed.
2.3.2.2. Meaning in life. State presence of meaning in life was
measured using five items, three of which assessed the
comprehension component of meaning in life (e.g., Steger,
2009): “I understand myself,”“I understand the world around
me,”and “I understand how I fit in the world.”One item was
assessed purpose (“I have a mission or purpose in my life”) and
Table 1
Correlations among Time 1 and Time 2 measures from the Global Questionnaire.
123456789101112
1 MLQ-P 0.86
2 MLQ-S 0.12 0.85
3 SWLS 0.38
nn
0.18 0.86
4 DASS-D 0.37
nn
0.16 0.54
nn
0.82
5 DASS-A 0.30
nn
0.10 0.33
nn
0.54
nn
0.62
6 DASS-S 0.34
nn
0.15 0.39
nn
0.69
nn
0.65
nn
0.80
7 T2MLQ-P 0.50
nn
0.33
nn
0.50
nn
0.35
nn
0.00 0.30
nn
0.84
8 T2MLQ-S 0.18 0.64
nn
0.05 0.09 0.06 0.07 0.27
n
0.92
9 T2SWLS 0.44
nn
0.15 0.74
nn
0.53
nn
0.16 0.43
nn
0.70
nn
0.13 0.85
10 T2DASS-D 0.29
nn
0.18 0.43
nn
0.76
nn
0.38
nn
0.54
nn
0.39
nn
0.12 0.54
nn
0.81
11 T2DASS-A 0.10 0.19 0.38
nn
0.44
nn
0.62
nn
0.43
nn
0.15 0.16 0.25
n
0.56
nn
0.74
12 T2DASS-S 0.21 0.02 0.32
nn
0.57
nn
0.38
nn
0.71
nn
0.33
nn
0.14 0.46
nn
0.69
nn
0.49
nn
0.81
N¼84 Note: alpha coefficients presented in diagonal. MLQ-P¼Meaning in Life Questionnaire-Presence subscale, MLQ-S ¼Meaning in Life Questionnaire-Search subscale,
SWLS¼Satisfaction with Life Scale, DASS-D ¼Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-Depression subscale, DASS-A ¼Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-Anxiety subscale, and
DASS-S¼Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale—stress subscale.
n
po.05
nn
po.01
M.F. Steger et al. / Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 3 (2014) 27–3028

one assessed general meaning (“My life feels meaningful”). State
search for meaning in life was measured using two items: “Iam
searching for meaning in my life”and “I am looking for my life's
purpose.”
2.3.2.3. Life satisfaction. State life satisfaction was measured using
two SWLS items: “I am satisfied with my life”and “In most ways
my life is close to the ideal.”
3. Results
For the Global Questionnaire well-being measures positively inter-
correlated and showing negative correlations with the DASS subscales
(Table 1). Interestingly, Time 1 search for meaning significantly,
negatively predict Time 2 presence of meaning. For the State Survey,
well-being measures also were positively intercorrelated (Table 2).
3.1. Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance
3.1.1. Global Questionnaire
Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were con-
ducted to assess the intervention's impact. Small to moderate
increases were observed for presence of meaning and life satisfac-
tion, with a marginally significant trend toward a significant
decrease in search for meaning (Table 3).
3.1.2. State Survey
Similarly, paired samples t-tests were conducted to determine
the in-the-moment impact of viewing and describing photographs
that support meaning in life. Significant increases were observed
for positive affect, meaning in life,
1
and life satisfaction, as well as
significant decreases in negative affect (Table 4).
4. Discussion
This pilot study is an initial attempt to test whether a new
photography intervention holds promise for helping people
explore and consolidate meaning in their lives. Despite the
minimal nature of this intervention (taking only 9–12 photos,
viewing and briefly describing them), significant within-person
increases in well-being were observed using both global and state
measures. Our intervention offers a unique way to explore mean-
ing that is not wholly dependent on language. This method offers
rich, deeply personal information as a topic for exploration within
therapy. This intervention may offer a new way to explore
concepts familiar to proponents of ACT. Asking clients to reflect
on why they selected specific content for their photos of meaning
Table 2
Correlations among Time 1 and Time 2 measures from the State Survey.
12345678910
1 Pre-PA 0.82
2 Pre-NA 0.45
nn
0.84
3 Pre-meaning 0.43
nn
0.39
nn
0.92
4 Pre-search 0.07 0.25
n
0.28
n
0.90
a
5 Pre-life sat 0.43
nn
0.28
n
0.59
nn
0.15 0.85
a
6 Post-PA 0.77
nn
0.35
nn
0.38
nn
0.06 0.36
nn
0.84
7 Post-NA 0.40
nn
0.83
nn
0.34
nn
0.20 0.25
n
0.45
nn
0.85
8 Post-meaning 0.35
nn
0.34
nn
0.89
nn
0.18 0.62
nn
0.43
nn
0.39
nn
0.93
9 Post-search 0.07 0.24
n
0.25
n
0.91
nn
0.12 0.02 0.24
n
0.17 0.90
a
10 Post-life sat 0.38
nn
0.33
nn
0.61
nn
0.19 0.90
nn
0.43
nn
0.34
nn
0.71
nn
0.19 0.80
a
N¼84 alpha coefficients presented in diagonal. Note: PA ¼positive affect, NA¼negative affect, Meaning ¼presence of meaning in life, Search¼search for meaning in life, Life
Sat¼satisfaction with life, “Pre”¼state survey completed prior to describing photos, “Post”¼state survey completed after describing photos.
a
Correlation between the two scale items.
n
po0.05.
nn
po0.01.
Table 3
Repeated measures NOVA for Global Questionnaire scales, pre- and post-intervention.
FEffect size dMean (SD)
score change
Time 1
M(SD)
Time 2
M(SD)
Presence of meaning in life 7.99
nn
0.31 1.07 (3.55) 20.44 (3.59) 21.49 (3.44)
Search for meaning in life 3.44
þ
0.17 0.76 (3.84) 17.40 (3.94) 16.78 (4.86)
Satisfaction with life 11.29
nnn
0.27 1.37 (3.80) 26.92 (5.31) 28.24 (5.02)
Depression 2.12 0.09 0.21 (1.98) 2.60 (2.82) 2.40 (2.94)
Anxiety 0.52 0.07 0.12 (1.81) 1.98 (2.13) 1.62 (2.20)
Stress 0.19 0.04 0.10 (2.49) 4.21 (3.10) 4.33 (3.42)
nn
po0.01.
nnn
po0.001.
þ
po0.10.
1
As an ancillary test of meaning in life theory's differentiation between
comprehension and purpose, we conducted separate paired samples t-tests for
the three comprehension items, the purpose item, and the meaningful life item,
which are otherwise combined in the state presence of meaning measure.
“Comprehension”scores significantly increased after participants described their
photographs (t(82)¼4.20, po0.001), as did scores on the item assessing purpose (t
(80)¼3.12, po0.01). However, scores on the meaningful life item did not
significantly increase (t(80)¼1.62, p¼0.11).
M.F. Steger et al. / Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 3 (2014) 27–30 29

could be leveraged to facilitate conversations about self-under-
standing, values clarity, and purposeful activity.
4.1. Limitations
These encouraging results are preliminary and should be
interpreted with caution for several reasons. First, this study
lacked a control group, making it impossible to rule out other
factors that might have boosted well-being (e.g., taking photos in
general). Second, the university sample raises questions of
whether the present results would generalize to other popula-
tions. Third, the State Survey measures were created for this study
and although their reliability was supported, there is no evidence
for their validity outside of this study. Fourth, scores on the DASS-
21 were not reduced by the intervention. Part of the explanation
for this failure may lie in the relatively low levels of psychological
distress reported by our sample. Also at issue is the fact that the
DASS-21 requests participants to report on the past two weeks but
the study was only one week long. Fifth, the one week duration of
the study is not sufficient to detect how quickly the intervention
effects decay.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, we present results from a pilot study of a new
intervention method consisting of taking photographs of what
makes life meaningful and describing those photos. This method is
an easy intervention to incorporate into existing psychological
treatment modalities and may offer an important avenue for
understanding—and improving—people's meaning in life.
References
Debats, D. L. (1996). Meaning in life: Clinical relevance and predictive power. British
Journal of Clinical Psychology,35, 503–516.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life
scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,49,71–75.
Dollinger, S. J., & Clancy, S. M. (1993). Identity, self, and personality: II. Glimpses
through the autographic eye. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,64,
106 4–10 71.
Greenstein, M., & Breitbart, W. (2000). Cancer and the experience of meaning: A
group psychotherapy for people with cancer. American Journal of Psychotherapy,
54, 486–500.
Harlow, L. L., Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler, P. M. (1986). Depression, self-derogation,
substance use, and suicide ideation: Lack of purpose in life as a mediational
factor. Journal of Clinical Psychology,42,5–21.
Hayes, S. C., & Strohsal, K. D. (2010). A practical guide to acceptance and commitment
therapy. New York: Springer.
Kashdan, T. B., Kane, J. Q., & Kecmanovic, J. (2011). Posttraumatic distress and the
presence of posttraumatic growth and meaning in life: Experiential avoidance
as a moderator. Personality and Individual Differences,50,84–89.
Kashdan, T. B., & McKnight, P. E. (2009). Origins of purpose in life: Refining our
understanding of a life well lived. Psychological Topics,18, 303–313.
King, L. A., Hicks, J. A., Krull, J. L., & Del Gaiso, A. K. (2006). Positive affect and the
experience of meaning in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,90,
179 –196.
Lee, V., Cohen, S. R., Edgar, L., Laizner, A. M., & Gagnon, A. (2006). Meaning-making
and psychological adjustment to cancer: Development of an intervention and
pilot results. OncolNurs Forum,33,291–302.
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states:
Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the beck
depression and anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy,33,
335–343.
Luoma, J. B., Hayes, S. C., & Walser, R. (2007). Learning ACT. Oakland: New
Harbinger.
Noland, C. M. (2006). Auto-photography as research practice: Identity and self-
esteem research. Journal of Research Practice,2,1–24.
Park, C. L., & Folkman, S. (1997). Meaning in the context of stress and coping. Review
of General Psychology,1,115–144.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations of the meaning of
psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,57,
1069–1081.
Steger, M. F. (2009). Meaning in life. In: S. J. Lopez (Ed.), Oxford handbook of positive
psychology (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Steger, M. F., Shim, Y., Brueske, L., Rush, B., Shin, J., & Merriman, L. (2013). The
mind’s eye: A photographic method for understanding meaning in people's
lives. Journal of Positive Psychology,8, 530–542.
Steger, M. F. (2012). Experiencing meaning in life: Optimal functioning at the nexus
of spirituality, psychopathology, and well-being. In: P. T.P. Wong (Ed.), The
human quest for meaning (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
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.
Steger, M. F., & Kashdan, T. B. (2009). Depression and everyday social activity,
intimacy, and well-being. Journal of Counseling Psychology,56, 289–300.
Steger, M. F., Mann, J., Michels, P., & Cooper, T. (2009). Meaning in life, anxiety,
depression, and general health among smoking cessation patients. Journal of
Psychosomatic Research,67, 353–358.
Steger, M. F., Sheline, K., Merriman, L., & Kashdan, T. B. (2013). Acceptance,
commitment, and meaning: Using the synergy between ACT and meaning in
life research to help. In: T. B. Kashdan, & J. Ciarrochi (Eds.), Mindfulness,
acceptance, and positive psychology (pp. 240–266). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger
Publications, Inc.
Thomas, M. E. (2009). Auto-photography. In: R. Kitchen, & N. Thrift (Eds.),
International encyclopedia of human geography (pp. 244–251). San Diego:
Elsevier Academic Press, Elsevier.
Triplett, K. N., Tedeschi, R. G., Cann, A., Calhoun, L. G., & Reeve, C. L. (2012).
Posttraumatic growth, meaning in life, and life satisfaction in response to
trauma. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy,4,400–410.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief
measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,54, 1063–1070 .
Wong, P. T. P. (1999). Towards an integrative model of meaning centered counseling
and therapy. The International Forum for Logotherapy,22,47–55.
Ziller, R. C., & Lewis, D. (1981). Orientations: Self, social, and environmental
percepts through auto-photography. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
7, 338–343.
Table 4
Repeated measures NOVA for State Survey scales administered immediately before and after participants wrote descriptions of their photographs.
TEffect size dMean (SD) score change Pre M(SD) Post M(SD)
Positive affect 11.66
nnn
0.25 21.05 (55.39) 328.35 (81.97) 348.89 (84.80)
Negative affect 34.20
nnn
0.37 38.84 (60.19) 124.76 (107.89) 86.49 (94.71)
Presence of meaning 17.40
nnn
0.22 18.99 (38.59) 359.36 (82.14) 377.17 (77.59)
Search for meaning 0.16 0.02 1.52 (25.84) 111.42 (57.48) 112.54 (61.04)
Life satisfaction 13.86
nnn
0.19 7.01 (17.34) 151.78 (38.21) 158.38 (34.47)
nnn
po0.001.
M.F. Steger et al. / Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science 3 (2014) 27–3030