Title |
Moving Beyond Mindfulness: Defining Equanimity as an Outcome Measure in Meditation and Contemplative Research
|
---|---|
Published in |
Mindfulness, January 2014
|
DOI | 10.1007/s12671-013-0269-8 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Gaëlle Desbordes, Tim Gard, Elizabeth A. Hoge, Britta K. Hölzel, Catherine Kerr, Sara W. Lazar, Andrew Olendzki, David R. Vago |
Abstract |
In light of a growing interest in contemplative practices such as meditation, the emerging field of contemplative science has been challenged to describe and objectively measure how these practices affect health and well-being. While "mindfulness" itself has been proposed as a measurable outcome of contemplative practices, this concept encompasses multiple components, some of which, as we review here, may be better characterized as equanimity. Equanimity can be defined as an even-minded mental state or dispositional tendency toward all experiences or objects, regardless of their origin or their affective valence (pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral). In this article we propose that equanimity be used as an outcome measure in contemplative research. We first define and discuss the inter-relationship between mindfulness and equanimity from the perspectives of both classical Buddhism and modern psychology and present existing meditation techniques for cultivating equanimity. We then review psychological, physiological, and neuroimaging methods that have been used to assess equanimity, either directly or indirectly. In conclusion, we propose that equanimity captures potentially the most important psychological element in the improvement of well-being, and therefore should be a focus in future research studies. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 7 | 23% |
Spain | 4 | 13% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 13% |
Indonesia | 2 | 7% |
Mexico | 1 | 3% |
Colombia | 1 | 3% |
Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 10 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 26 | 87% |
Scientists | 3 | 10% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 7 | 1% |
Germany | 1 | <1% |
Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
Ireland | 1 | <1% |
Austria | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Other | 2 | <1% |
Unknown | 554 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 104 | 18% |
Student > Master | 87 | 15% |
Researcher | 64 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 51 | 9% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 44 | 8% |
Other | 116 | 20% |
Unknown | 105 | 18% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Psychology | 252 | 44% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 6% |
Social Sciences | 30 | 5% |
Neuroscience | 26 | 5% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 18 | 3% |
Other | 86 | 15% |
Unknown | 125 | 22% |