Mind the Echo Chamber: Mindfulness as a Contemplative Practice That can Contribute to Public Health

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Julieta Galante, Nicholas T. Van Dam
{"title":"Mind the Echo Chamber: Mindfulness as a Contemplative Practice That can Contribute to Public Health","authors":"Julieta Galante, Nicholas T. Van Dam","doi":"10.1007/s12671-024-02343-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We offer an invited commentary on the article entitled “Mindfulness for Global Public Health: Critical Analysis and Agenda” by Doug Oman. First, we question his proposal that it would be advantageous to include a more diverse set of contemplative practices under the mindfulness umbrella term, and instead we argue for the opposite. We propose that academics move the term mindfulness away from the spotlight, acknowledging the role of popular culture in its constant reshaping, while studying the mechanisms and outcomes of contemplative practices such as mindfulness using better delineated terms from relevant academic disciplines. Second, we argue that a head-to-head comparison between the fields of mindfulness and public health incurs a category error. While mindfulness is often defined by a limited set of specific processes and practices, public health is a field defined by its application, irrespective of the practices or interventions used. Instead, thinking of mindfulness as an aid to public health can bring more clarity and increase the scope and impact of the contributions that the mindfulness field can make to public health. We illustrate how this reframing helps see mindfulness training as a potential individual-level component of multi-level public health interventions to tackle social determinants of health, rather than expect mindfulness training to address this singlehandedly. For this potential to realize fully, we argue that the mindfulness field will need to work “with” rather than “as” public health, moving away from the practitioner-researcher model to a collaborative one, whereby mindfulness intervention developers partner with independent public health researchers for intervention evaluation and implementation purposes. In such a model, using participatory research methods, the public health team should first seek to understand the local community health needs, and assess whether and how mindfulness practitioners may be able to address some of those needs. We are delighted that the field is having these conversations, and hope to advance understanding of the potential of contemplative practices to contribute to public health research and implementation efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":18523,"journal":{"name":"Mindfulness","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mindfulness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-024-02343-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We offer an invited commentary on the article entitled “Mindfulness for Global Public Health: Critical Analysis and Agenda” by Doug Oman. First, we question his proposal that it would be advantageous to include a more diverse set of contemplative practices under the mindfulness umbrella term, and instead we argue for the opposite. We propose that academics move the term mindfulness away from the spotlight, acknowledging the role of popular culture in its constant reshaping, while studying the mechanisms and outcomes of contemplative practices such as mindfulness using better delineated terms from relevant academic disciplines. Second, we argue that a head-to-head comparison between the fields of mindfulness and public health incurs a category error. While mindfulness is often defined by a limited set of specific processes and practices, public health is a field defined by its application, irrespective of the practices or interventions used. Instead, thinking of mindfulness as an aid to public health can bring more clarity and increase the scope and impact of the contributions that the mindfulness field can make to public health. We illustrate how this reframing helps see mindfulness training as a potential individual-level component of multi-level public health interventions to tackle social determinants of health, rather than expect mindfulness training to address this singlehandedly. For this potential to realize fully, we argue that the mindfulness field will need to work “with” rather than “as” public health, moving away from the practitioner-researcher model to a collaborative one, whereby mindfulness intervention developers partner with independent public health researchers for intervention evaluation and implementation purposes. In such a model, using participatory research methods, the public health team should first seek to understand the local community health needs, and assess whether and how mindfulness practitioners may be able to address some of those needs. We are delighted that the field is having these conversations, and hope to advance understanding of the potential of contemplative practices to contribute to public health research and implementation efforts.

警惕回音室正念作为一种可促进公共健康的沉思实践
我们应邀对 Doug Oman 撰写的题为 "全球公共卫生的正念:批判性分析与议程 "一文的特约评论。首先,我们质疑他的提议,即在正念这一总括术语下包含更多样化的沉思练习是有利的,而我们的主张恰恰相反。我们建议学术界将正念一词从聚光灯下移开,承认大众文化在不断重塑正念中的作用,同时使用相关学科中更明确的术语来研究正念等沉思练习的机制和结果。其次,我们认为,将正念与公共卫生领域进行正面比较会造成分类错误。正念通常是由一套有限的具体过程和实践来定义的,而公共卫生则是一个由其应用来定义的领域,无论使用何种实践或干预措施。相反,将正念视为公共卫生的一种辅助手段,可以使正念领域对公共卫生的贡献更加清晰,范围更广,影响更大。我们说明了这种重新构思如何有助于将正念训练视为多层次公共卫生干预中潜在的个人层面的组成部分,以解决健康的社会决定因素,而不是期望正念训练能单独解决这个问题。为了充分发挥这一潜力,我们认为正念领域需要 "与 "公共卫生合作,而不是 "作为 "公共卫生,从实践者-研究者模式转变为合作模式,即正念干预措施开发者与独立的公共卫生研究者合作,共同进行干预措施的评估和实施。在这种模式下,公共卫生团队应使用参与式研究方法,首先设法了解当地社区的健康需求,并评估正念实践者是否以及如何能够满足其中的一些需求。我们很高兴该领域正在进行这些对话,并希望能促进对正念实践潜力的理解,从而为公共卫生研究和实施工作做出贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Mindfulness
Mindfulness Multiple-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
19.40%
发文量
224
期刊介绍: Mindfulness seeks to advance research, clinical practice, and theory on mindfulness. It is interested in manuscripts from diverse viewpoints, including psychology, psychiatry, medicine, neurobiology, psychoneuroendocrinology, cognitive, behavioral, cultural, philosophy, spirituality, and wisdom traditions. Mindfulness encourages research submissions on the reliability and validity of assessment of mindfulness; clinical uses of mindfulness in psychological distress, psychiatric disorders, and medical conditions; alleviation of personal and societal suffering; the nature and foundations of mindfulness; mechanisms of action; and the use of mindfulness across cultures. The Journal also seeks to promote the use of mindfulness by publishing scholarly papers on the training of clinicians, institutional staff, teachers, parents, and industry personnel in mindful provision of services. Examples of topics include: Mindfulness-based psycho-educational interventions for children with learning, emotional, and behavioral disorders Treating depression and clinical symptoms in patients with chronic heart failure Yoga and mindfulness Cognitive-behavioral mindfulness group therapy interventions Mindfulnessness and emotional regulation difficulties in children Loving-kindness meditation to increase social connectedness Training for parents and children with ADHD Recovery from substance abuse Changing parents’ mindfulness Child management skills Treating childhood anxiety and depression
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信