CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 587Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Perils and promise in defining and measuring mindfulness: Observations from experience.

Brown, Kirk Warren, Ryan, Richard M.·2004·Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
DOI 10.1093/clipsy.bph078
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

As mindfulness research advances on a variety of fronts, it has become increasingly important to carefully define and measure the construct. In this commentary, we draw from our recent research experience on these topics in addressing four issues of primary concern to Bishop et al: The nature of mindfulness, the role of acceptance in the phenomenon, the relation between mindfulness and meditation, and the measurement of mindfulness in meditative and other contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/clipsy.bph078

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Brown and Ryan (2004) argued that mindfulness is paying attention carefully to what is actually happening in each moment without trying to alter or change it, or put a conceptual framework around it.

    “In a similar vein, Brown and Ryan (2004) argued that mindfulness is paying attention carefully to what is actually happening in each moment without trying to alter or change (cf. acceptance), or put a conceptual framework around it.”

    From Mindfulness, Interpretation Bias, and Levels of Anxiety and Depression: Two Mediation Studies (2019) · cites this paper as Brown and Ryan 2004

  • Operational definitions of mindfulness are essential for the development of valid instruments, which in turn are necessary for investigating the psychological processes involved in mindfulness training.

    “Brown and Ryan (2004) and Bishop et al. (2004) made similar points, arguing that operational definitions of mindfulness are essential for the development of valid instruments, which in turn are necessary for investigating the psychological processes involved in mindfulness training.”

    From Using Self-Report Assessment Methods to Explore Facets of Mindfulness (2006) · cites this paper as Brown and Ryan (2004)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2004
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
242-248
ISSN
  • 0969-5893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2850
DOI
10.1093/clipsy.bph078
OpenAlex
W2169551146
Cited by
585
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 31
FWCI
10.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 4261 d)
Locations
Clinical Psychology Science and Practice (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
mindfulness, construct definition, mindfulness measurement, acceptance, meditation

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