77
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A mind you can count on: validating breath counting as a behavioral measure of mindfulness

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Mindfulness practice of present moment awareness promises many benefits, but has eluded rigorous behavioral measurement. To date, research has relied on self-reported mindfulness or heterogeneous mindfulness trainings to infer skillful mindfulness practice and its effects. In four independent studies with over 400 total participants, we present the first construct validation of a behavioral measure of mindfulness, breath counting. We found it was reliable, correlated with self-reported mindfulness, differentiated long-term meditators from age-matched controls, and was distinct from sustained attention and working memory measures. In addition, we employed breath counting to test the nomological network of mindfulness. As theorized, we found skill in breath counting associated with more meta-awareness, less mind wandering, better mood, and greater non-attachment (i.e., less attentional capture by distractors formerly paired with reward). We also found in a randomized online training study that 4 weeks of breath counting training improved mindfulness and decreased mind wandering relative to working memory training and no training controls. Together, these findings provide the first evidence for breath counting as a behavioral measure of mindfulness.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Mindfulness: A Proposed Operational Definition

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control.

            A load theory of attention in which distractor rejection depends on the level and type of load involved in current processing was tested. A series of experiments demonstrates that whereas high perceptual load reduces distractor interference, working memory load or dual-task coordination load increases distractor interference. These findings suggest 2 selective attention mechanisms: a perceptual selection mechanism serving to reduce distractor perception in situations of high perceptual load that exhaust perceptual capacity in processing relevant stimuli and a cognitive control mechanism that reduces interference from perceived distractors as long as cognitive control functions are available to maintain current priorities (low cognitive load). This theory resolves the long-standing early versus late selection debate and clarifies the role of cognitive control in selective attention. ((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Construct validity in psychological tests.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                17 September 2014
                24 October 2014
                2014
                : 5
                : 1202
                Affiliations
                [1]Waisman Laboratory for Brain Imaging and Behavior, Center for Investigating Healthy Minds, Psychology Department, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI USA
                Author notes

                Edited by: Heather Berlin, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA

                Reviewed by: Mattie Tops, VU University Amsterdam, Netherlands; Zoran Josipovic, New York University, USA

                *Correspondence: Daniel B. Levinson and Richard J. Davidson, Waisman Laboratory for Brain Imaging and Behavior, Center for Investigating Healthy Minds, Psychology Department, University of Wisconsin–Madison, 1500 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705, USA e-mail: danlevinson@ 123456alumni.stanford.edu ; rjdavids@ 123456wisc.edu

                This article was submitted to Consciousness Research, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01202
                4208398
                25386148
                e15886a5-6e3b-4008-afa0-0521cbfe5248
                Copyright © 2014 Levinson, Stoll, Kindy, Merry and Davidson.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 22 July 2014
                : 05 October 2014
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 61, Pages: 10, Words: 0
                Categories
                Psychology
                Methods Article

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                mindfulness,mind wandering,task-unrelated thought,attention,meta-awareness,meta-cognition,wanting,working memory training

                Comments

                Comment on this article