Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Research on Mindfulness and Meditation

By Richard J. Davidson, Alfred W. Kaszniak. American Psychologist, 2015

678 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Both basic science and clinical research on mindfulness, meditation, and related constructs has dramatically increased in recent years. However, interpretation of these research results has been challenging. The present article addresses unique conceptual and methodological problems posed by research in this area. Included among the key topics is the role of first person experience and how it can be best studied; the challenges posed by intervention research designs in which true double-blinding is not possible; the nature of control and comparison conditions for research that includes mindfulness or other meditation-based interventions; issues in the adequate description of mindfulness and related trainings and interventions; the question of how mindfulness can be measured; questions regarding what can and cannot be inferred from self-report measures; and considerations regarding the structure of study design and data analyses. Most of these topics are germane to both basic and clinical research studies and have important bearing on the future scientific understanding of mindfulness and meditation.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/393f8331ca0d8b88ccf51a6dd62b63e9cf8cf161

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Mind The Hype: A Critical Evaluation and Prescriptive Agenda for Research on Mindfulness and Meditation (2017, neutral): “…has been derived from the original MBSR model (Kabat-Zinn, 1990), the intensity (hours per day) and duration (total time commitment) of participants’ formal practice have varied considerably across different versions of training (Davidson & Kaszniak, 2015; Tang et al., 2007; Zeidan et al., 2011).”
Mindfulness-based interventions in the workplace: An inclusive systematic review and meta-analysis of their impact upon wellbeing (2018, background): “…and reported-on (from a methodological perspective) would also be well-run and facilitated (from a participant perspective), with good quality mindfulness teaching and support, thus enhancing the learning experience of participants (see Davidson and Kaszniak (2015) for commentary on this topic).”
Meditating for the Planet: Effects of a Mindfulness-Based Intervention on Sustainable Consumption Behaviors (2020, methodology): “These designs preclude inferences of a causal effect of mindfulness practice on SCB which appears to be implied in some of the aforementioned works (Davidson & Kaszniak, 2015; Spencer, Zanna, & Fong, 2005).”
Mindfulness, Pro-environmental Behavior, and Belief in Climate Change: The Mediating Role of Social Dominance (2018, background): “As noted by Davidson and Kaszniak (2015), in addition to self-reports, trait mindfulness can be studied comparing practitioners and nonpractitioners of Buddhist meditation as it could be expected that this practice will produce enduring changes in psychological functioning even outside the context…”
Mindfulness Interventions. (2017, neutral): “Advances in the development of mindfulness measures will likely help clarify the mechanistic role of self-report and behavioral measures of mindfulness in the coming years (for a commentary, see Davidson & Kaszniak 2015).”