Cited by 699Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMind wandering and attentionReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

Investigating the phenomenological matrix of mindfulness-related practices from a neurocognitive perspective.

Open access
Lutz, Antoine, Jha, Amishi P., Dunne, John D., Saron, Clifford D.·2015·American Psychologist

Abstract

There has been a great increase in literature concerned with the effects of a variety of mental training regimes that generally fall within what might be called contemplative practices, and a majority of these studies have focused on mindfulness. Mindfulness meditation practices can be conceptualized as a set of attention-based, regulatory, and self-inquiry training regimes cultivated for various ends, including wellbeing and psychological health. This article examines the construct of mindfulness in psychological research and reviews recent, nonclinical work in this area. Instead of proposing a single definition of mindfulness, we interpret it as a continuum of practices involving states and processes that can be mapped into a multidimensional phenomenological matrix which itself can be expressed in a neurocognitive framework. This phenomenological matrix of mindfulness is presented as a heuristic to guide formulation of next-generation research hypotheses from both cognitive/behavioral and neuroscientific perspectives. In relation to this framework, we review selected findings on mindfulness cultivated through practices in traditional and research settings, and we conclude by identifying significant gaps in the literature and outline new directions for research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0039585

Cites

174 of 174 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The basic components of attention monitoring and acceptance are common factors across multi-dimensional models of mindfulness training.

    “the basic components of attention monitoring and acceptance are common factors across these models.”

    From Mechanisms of mindfulness training: Monitor and Acceptance Theory (MAT (2017) · cites this paper as Lutz, Jha, Dunne, & Saron, 2015

  • The construct of dispositional mindfulness entails several problematic aspects, including the assumption that self-report mindfulness scales actually tap into the proper practices of mindfulness, unknown specificity of the instruments to MBIs, potential biased responses due to verbal exposure to the word and concept of mindfulness, and a wide range of confounders that impact the dispositional ''

    “Nevertheless, the construct of dispositional mindfulness entails several problematic aspects, starting from the assumption that self-report mindfulness scales (basically the self-perception of a person) actually tap into the proper practices of mindfulness (Grossman, 2011).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Husserl E Brough JB On the phenomenology of the consciousness of internal time 2008 Boston Springer (Softcover reprint of the original 1st ed. 1991 edition).
  2. Orenstein, Joel. (n.d.) The mindful lawyer meditation and the practice of law Retrieved May 22, 2014 from http://www.liv.asn.au/Practice-Resources/Law-Institute-Journal/Archived-Issues/LIJ-July-2011/The-mindful-lawyer--meditation-and-the-practice
  3. Van Vugt MK Hitchcock P Shahar B Britton W The effects of MBCT on affective memory associations in depression: Measuring recall dynamics in a randomized controlled trial Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2012 6 257 23049507 PMC3446543

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lutz, A., Jha, A. P., Dunne, J. D., & Saron, C. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Miami (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • University of California System (US)
Venue
American Psychologist
Published
2015-10
Volume
70
Issue
7
Pages
632-658
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
OpenAlex
W2410872259
Cited by
697
References
173
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 78 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 7
FWCI
54.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Psychologist (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (P01AT004952)
  • Sponsor name not included (FP7-PEOPLE-2009-RG)
  • European Research Council (617739)
  • Adam J. Weissman Foundation
  • Department of Army (W81XWH-12–2-0051 and W81XWH-11–2-0124)
  • Fetzer Institute (2191)
  • John Templeton Foundation (39970)
  • Hershey Family Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
mindfulness, mindfulness meditation, contemplative practice, attentional control, self-inquiry, well-being, mental health, mental training, research hypotheses
MeSH terms
Attention, Cognition, Humans, Mental Health, Research, Stress, Psychological, Meditation, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review