Shanta Rohse's Bookmarks tagged journal_of_social_issues →  View Popular

When I speak of "mindfulness," I define mindfulness in this article via Langer' s (1997) definition, as containing components of (a) openness to novelty; (b) alertness to distinction; (c) sensitivity to different contexts; (d) implicit, if not explicit, awareness of multiple perspectives; and (e) orientation in the present. Mindfulness thus is a many-sided, or heterogeneous, construct. "Mindlessness" is the lack of these attributes. But how should mindfulness (in contrast to mindlessness) be understood?

A cognitive ability can be viewed as a latent source of cognitive skill and usually also is viewed as a source of individual differences in such skills. Cognitive abilities are most often identified by (a) the existence of systematic and relatively stable individual differences, usually through factor analysis or related techniques, or (b) the identification of a unique processing component that accounts for differences in performance of a given individual on various tasks or task variants (Sternberg, 1977). In other words, the ability is a source of variation among either persons, stimulus conditions, or both.

The most thorough taxonomy, at least from a psychometric perspective, is that of Carroll (1993). Carroll conducted an exhaustive review and reanalysis of more than 460 data sets in the factor-analytic literature. These data sets all used covariation-correlation information in order to obtain factor structures underlying the scores comprising the data sets. The assumption is that the factors underlying the scores represent latent mental abilities. The classes of abilities he identified included (a) general abilities (e.g., fluid ability and crystallized abilities); (b) reasoning abilities (e.g., verbal reasoning and syllogistic reasoning); (c) abilities in the domain of language behavior (e.g., verbal comprehension and spelling ability); (d) memory abilities (e.g., associative memory and memory span); (e) visual perception abilities (e.g., perceptual speed and closure speed); (f) auditory perception abilities (e.g. , pitch discrimination and auditory closure); (g) number facility (no more specific abilities were identified); (h) mental speed abilities (e.g., general mental speed and simple reaction time); (i) abilities in producing and retrieving words, ideas, and figural creations (e.g., ideational fluency and word fluency); (j) sensory abilities (e.g., auditory hearing threshold and visual acuity); (k) attention and concentration abilities (e.g., attention and concentration, and carefulness and attention to detail); and (1) abilities pertaining to interpersonal behavior (e.g., interpretation of facial expressions and gestures).

We believe that mindfulness theory should enable us to change both individuals and institutions in two ways: (a) by increasing mindfulness and (b) decreasing mindlessness. The first is a direct approach aimed at implementing new programs and procedures that take as their goal an increase in our awareness of multiple perspectives. The second is less direct and takes as its target changing existing programs and procedures, with the aim of eliminating those aspects that unwittingly promote mindlessness.

Mindfulness is not an easy concept to define but can be best understood as the process of drawing novel distinctions. It does not matter whether what is noticed is important or trivial, as long as it is new to the viewer. Actively drawing these distinctions keeps us situated in the present. It also makes us more aware of the context and perspective of our actions than if we rely upon distinctions and categories drawn in the past. Under this latter situation, rules and routines are more likely to govern our behavior, irrespective of the current circumstances, and this can be construed as mindless behavior. The process of drawing novel distinctions can lead to a number of diverse consequences, including (1) a greater sensitivity to one's environment, (2) more openness to new information, (3) the creation of new categories for structuring perception, and (4) enhanced awareness of multiple perspectives in problem solving. The subjective "feel" of mindfulness is that of a heightened state of involvement and wakef ulness or being in the present. This subjective state is the inherent common thread that ties together the extremely diverse observable consequences for the viewer. Mindfulness is not a cold cognitive process. When one is actively drawing novel distinctions, the whole individual is involved.

For example, many of us believe that we should learn the basics of a task so well that they become second nature to us. Having mindlessly accepted this information, it rarely occurs to us to question who determined what the basics are.

The problem, however, is that if one follows this instruction, it is very difficult to stay attentive. In contrast, in studies with children, college students and the elderly, (Langer & Bodner, 1997; Langer, Carson, & Shih, in press; Levy & Langer, in press), we found that if people are instructed to vary the stimulus, that is, to mindfully notice new things about it, then attention improves. Moreover, such mindful attention also results in a greater liking for the task and improved memory.