Exam Study Guides
Both exams are multiple choice, built for about an hour so nobody races. The methods thread runs through everything — it ran through everything we did. No item asks you to be self-compassionate. Though exam morning might.
Exam 1 — Units I–III (session 13)
Coverage: sessions 1–12. Organized by session; key studies flagged.
Unit I — Roots (sessions 1–4)
Three components and their shadows (self-kindness/self-judgment, common humanity/isolation, mindfulness/over-identification) and the SYSTEM claim (mindfulness as prerequisite; why the whole exceeds the parts). Informal definition. Dukkha; the two arrows (first = pain, second = optional suffering). The Four Immeasurables (metta, karuna, mudita, upekkha). Transmission: 1893 Parliament → insight teachers → Kabat-Zinn 1979 (the secularization template: course, manual, measurable) → Neff 2003 (construct + scale) → Germer/MSC 2010 → RCT 2012. What changed vs. survived in translation. Neff (2003b): what operationalization required; SCS structure; reverse-scoring — what it is and why. State vs. trait preview.
Unit II — The science of relating to yourself (sessions 5–8)
Self-esteem: James's ratio; the movement and its reckoning (Baumeister review — feeling good ≠ causing good outcomes); contingent self-worth (Crocker's stock market). Neff & Vonk (2009): stability of self-worth, less contingency, less comparison, the narcissism contrast; correlational limits. Killingsworth & Gilbert (2010): experience sampling, ~47%, wandering precedes unhappiness; the DMN's three jobs. Suffering = Pain × Resistance; backdraft — why it happens, the three steps, backdraft vs. "this floods me." Myths as hypotheses. Breines & Chen (2012): design (random assignment; the self-esteem control), the four findings, why experiments buy "increases." Neff et al. (2005): mastery vs. performance goals; fear of failure as mechanism. Loving-kindness: wishes vs. affirmations; Wood et al. (2009) backfire finding and its mechanism (counterargument); phrase design specs; needs vs. wants.
Unit III — How it works (sessions 9–12)
Leary et al. (2007): everyday events, diaries; less negative emotion, less catastrophizing, MORE responsibility-taking; held controlling self-esteem; the induction study. The critic's functional account (bodyguard; safety); discernment vs. contempt; kindness with a spine. Gilbert's three circles (threat/drive/soothing; soothing = caregiving system; self-criticism = attacker and attacked). Why touch/tone/long-exhale are the practice inputs. Svendsen (2016) HRV correlate; Berry (2020) training alters pain response; calibration of the mechanism literature. Values vs. goals vs. norms; the energy test; Zhang (2019) authenticity; Lindsay & Creswell (2014). Measurement: factor analysis in one breath; the two-factor/self-coldness case (item overlap with pathology) vs. the defense (bifactor general factor; system claim; interventions move both poles); current practice (report subscales; suspicion of negative-item-driven correlations); state vs. trait SCS.
Exam 2 — Units IV–VI (session 24)
Coverage: sessions 14–23. Non-cumulative, but the methods reflexes carry over.
Interventions (session 14)
Neff & Germer (2012): pilot→RCT, waitlist control, gains maintained 6 mo/1 yr; what waitlists rule out (time, retesting, regression) and don't (expectancy, attention, belonging). Smeets (2014): 3 weeks, ACTIVE control — why that's a stronger sentence. Dundas (2017): 2 weeks. Ferrari (2019) meta-analysis: effect size as common ruler; pooled effects (large on SC, moderate on distress); the critiques (waitlist inflation, self-report, volunteers). The calibrated conclusion. The mirror: which critiques apply to your own project.
Difficult emotions & shame (sessions 15–16)
Five stages of acceptance; one notch, not the staircase. Three handles: affect labeling (Creswell/Lieberman — amygdala), bodily maps (Nummenmaa 2014), soften–soothe–allow + the warning label (side effect, not goal). Why anger is excluded (armored/protective → fierce toolkit). Guilt vs. shame (Tangney: behavior vs. self; repair vs. hide). The three paradoxes mapped to components (innocent/wish-to-be-loved → kindness; universal → common humanity; temporary-partial → mindfulness). Gilbert & Procter (2006): compassionate mind training — training warmth, not just insight. Johnson & O'Brien (2013): experimental; SC writing about shame vs. expressive writing; rumination at follow-up. Shame runs on silence.
Clinical (sessions 17–18)
The evidence ladder: cross-sectional → prospective → treatment. Krieger (2013): outpatients; associations via rumination/avoidance; the arrow problem. Hiraoka (2015): veterans; baseline SC predicted 12-month PTSD severity CONTROLLING baseline symptoms — why that clause matters. Trauma pacing caution. Turk & Waller (2020) meta: eating pathology/body image; risk marker vs. protective factor vs. treatment target. CFT: "insight without warmth"; train the delivery system (soothing system); evidence calibrated (promising; younger than CBT; best for high shame).
The social world (sessions 19–22)
Sbarra (2012): observer-rated SC from recorded speech; divorce adjustment over 9 months; why observer ratings escape the self-report bubble. Körner & Schütz (2024): actor AND partner effects. Two pains: disconnection vs. connection. Neff & Pommier (2013): the near-zero SC↔other-compassion correlation in undergrads; meditators integrate. Empathy vs. compassion; Klimecki (2014): empathy training → distress, compassion training → positive affect; "compassion fatigue" as empathy fatigue; equanimity ≠ detachment. Yarnell (2015): d ≈ .18, men slightly higher; why the intuition fails; norms > sex. Wasylkiw & Clairo (2018): SC ↔ openness to counseling in men. Fierce vs. tender SC. Neff et al. (2008): Thailand > US > Taiwan; practices of self-relation, not East/West; SC→wellbeing in all three; measurement invariance. Religion: bridges (grace/common humanity), frictions, adaptations work (Rezapour-Mirsaleh 2024).
Living it (session 23)
Negativity bias (Rozin & Royzman; Velcro/Teflon); savoring as permission; gratitude evidence (Emmons & McCullough 2003; Wood et al. 2010); the weaponized-gratitude caveat; self-appreciation and the ubuntu bridge; maintenance rules.
Format notes for both exams: expect design-logic items (what does this control rule out? which rung is this study on? which claim does this finding license?), mechanism items (which component answers which process?), and finding items (direction and rough size, never memorized decimals — d ≈ .18's DIRECTION is fair game; its third decimal is not).