Reconceptualizing the relationship between anxiety, mindfulness, and cognitive control

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Resh S. Gupta , Wendy Heller , Todd S. Braver
{"title":"Reconceptualizing the relationship between anxiety, mindfulness, and cognitive control","authors":"Resh S. Gupta ,&nbsp;Wendy Heller ,&nbsp;Todd S. Braver","doi":"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2025.106146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Prior research has provided initial support for the claim that cognitive control mediates the relationship between anxiety and mindfulness; however, findings are often inconsistent. In this review, we argue that the inconsistency may be due to a lack of both conceptual and methodological precision in terms of how anxiety, cognitive control, and mindfulness are operationalized and assessed, and that this imprecision may be a critical source of study confounds and ambiguous outcomes. We unpack this argument by first decomposing anxiety, cognitive control, mindfulness, and relevant experimental paradigms into key dimensions in order to develop a non-unitary, multi-dimensional taxonomy of these constructs. Subsequently, we review and reinterpret the prior experimental literature, focusing on studies that examine the relationship between anxiety and cognitive control, mindfulness and cognitive control, and the three-way relationship between anxiety, mindfulness, and cognitive control. Across the reviewed studies, there was great variation in the dimensions being examined and the behavioral and/or neural measures employed; therefore, results were often mixed. Based on this review of literature, we propose a conceptually and methodologically precise framework from which to study the effects of mindfulness on cognitive control in anxiety. The framework theoretically aligns anxiety dimensions with specific mindfulness states and interventions, further suggesting how these will impact specific cognitive control dimensions (proactive, reactive). These can be assessed with experimental paradigms and associated behavioral and neural metrics to index the relevant dimensions with high precision. Novel experimental studies and tractable research designs are also proposed to rigorously test this theoretical framework.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56105,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 106146"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763425001460","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Prior research has provided initial support for the claim that cognitive control mediates the relationship between anxiety and mindfulness; however, findings are often inconsistent. In this review, we argue that the inconsistency may be due to a lack of both conceptual and methodological precision in terms of how anxiety, cognitive control, and mindfulness are operationalized and assessed, and that this imprecision may be a critical source of study confounds and ambiguous outcomes. We unpack this argument by first decomposing anxiety, cognitive control, mindfulness, and relevant experimental paradigms into key dimensions in order to develop a non-unitary, multi-dimensional taxonomy of these constructs. Subsequently, we review and reinterpret the prior experimental literature, focusing on studies that examine the relationship between anxiety and cognitive control, mindfulness and cognitive control, and the three-way relationship between anxiety, mindfulness, and cognitive control. Across the reviewed studies, there was great variation in the dimensions being examined and the behavioral and/or neural measures employed; therefore, results were often mixed. Based on this review of literature, we propose a conceptually and methodologically precise framework from which to study the effects of mindfulness on cognitive control in anxiety. The framework theoretically aligns anxiety dimensions with specific mindfulness states and interventions, further suggesting how these will impact specific cognitive control dimensions (proactive, reactive). These can be assessed with experimental paradigms and associated behavioral and neural metrics to index the relevant dimensions with high precision. Novel experimental studies and tractable research designs are also proposed to rigorously test this theoretical framework.
重新定义焦虑、正念和认知控制之间的关系
先前的研究为认知控制调节焦虑和正念之间的关系的说法提供了初步支持;然而,研究结果往往不一致。在这篇综述中,我们认为这种不一致可能是由于在焦虑、认知控制和正念如何运作和评估方面缺乏概念和方法上的精确性,这种不精确性可能是研究混淆和模棱两可结果的关键来源。我们首先将焦虑、认知控制、正念和相关的实验范式分解为关键维度,以便对这些结构进行非单一的、多维的分类,从而解开这一论点。随后,我们回顾和重新解释了先前的实验文献,重点研究了焦虑与认知控制、正念与认知控制的关系,以及焦虑、正念和认知控制的三方关系。在回顾的研究中,在被检查的维度和所采用的行为和/或神经测量方面存在很大差异;因此,结果往往喜忧参半。在回顾文献的基础上,我们提出了一个概念上和方法上精确的框架来研究正念对焦虑认知控制的影响。该框架从理论上将焦虑维度与特定的正念状态和干预措施联系起来,进一步表明这些将如何影响特定的认知控制维度(主动、被动)。这些可以用实验范式和相关的行为和神经指标进行评估,以高精度地索引相关维度。本文还提出了新颖的实验研究和易于处理的研究设计,以严格检验这一理论框架。
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
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
466
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the International Behavioral Neuroscience Society publishes original and significant review articles that explore the intersection between neuroscience and the study of psychological processes and behavior. The journal also welcomes articles that primarily focus on psychological processes and behavior, as long as they have relevance to one or more areas of neuroscience.
×
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