ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

After mindfulness is defined, a brief history of the research on the topic to date is reviewed. This work essentially falls into three categories: health, business, and education. Considerations of mindlessness as a social issue are then addressed. A brief introduction to the articles in this issue follows. These articles speak to mindfulness as it relates to potential solutions to social problems.
The Construct of Mindfulness
Ellen J. Langer*
Harvard University
Mihnea Moldoveanu
University of Toronto
After mindfulness is defined, a brief history of the research on the topic to date is
reviewed. This work essentially falls into three categories: health, business, and
education. Considerations of mindlessness as a social issue are then addressed. A
brief introduction to the articles in this issue follows. These articles speak to mind-
fulness as it relates to potential solutions to social problems.
Themainpurposeofthisissueistooffersocialscientistsandpolicymakersan
alternative lens through which to view and understand the social phenomena and
issues that interest them. Although the concept of mindfulness overlaps with many
otherconstructs in psychology (a fuller discussion of this is provided inthe follow-
ingarticle,bySternberg),italsoofferssomeuniqueperspectives on how to investi-
gate psychological processes. The concept of mindfulness and the related concept
of mindlessness were introduced to social psychology more than 2 decades ago.
They have been applied to many diverse areas, including psychopathology, devel-
opmental psychology, education research, political theory, and communication
processes, to name a few.
Definition of Constructs
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
1
© 2000 The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues
Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2000, pp. 1–9
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ellen Langer, Professor, Depart-
ment of Psychology, Harvard University, William James Hall, 33 Kirkland Street, Cambridge, MA
02138 [e-mail: langer@wjh.harvard.edu].
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 catego-
ries 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
construedas mindless behavior. The process of drawing noveldistinctionscanlead
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 cate-
gories for structuring perception, and (4) enhanced awareness of multiple perspec-
tives in problem solving. The subjective “feel” of mindfulness is that of a
heightened state of involvement and wakefulness or being in the present. This sub-
jective state is the inherent common thread that ties together the extremely diverse
observable consequences for the viewer. Mindfulness is not a cold cognitive pro-
cess. When one is actively drawing novel distinctions, the whole individual is
involved.
Brief History of Research
Research on the differences that emanate from mindful versus mindless
behavior began in 1974, and the results have been both wide-ranging and of great
practical concern. Early work focused on looking at basic characteristics of mind-
fulness (e.g., Chanowitz & Langer, 1981; Langer, Blank, & Chanowitz, 1978).
Studieswithrelevancetosocialissues fall into three major categories: health, busi-
ness, and education.
Studies of health ramifications were among the earliest studies of mindful-
ness.These focused upon aging and the issueofcontrol. Perceived control has been
shown to have very positive effects on stress reduction and health (e.g., Geer,
Davison, & Gatchel, 1970; Langer, Janis, & Wolfer, 1975). It is the perception of
control, rather than any objectively viewed control, that is the significant variable.
Interestingly, when a person behaves mindlessly, the perception of control is not
possible. Therefore, we conducted several investigations (e.g., Alexander, Langer,
Newman, Chandler, & Davies, 1989; Langer, Beck, Janoff-Bulman, & Timko,
1984) to see if mindfulness in elderly populations could be increased with positive
effects.We found that this could be accomplished with relatively simple manipula-
tions, for example, having more control over one’s schedule and taking care of
plans. Mindful treatments had dramatic effects: They decreased adverse health
symptoms such as arthritis pain and alcoholism and increased longevity (see
Langer, 1989, for a more detailed review of this work and further examples of the
effect of mindfulness on health).
Thosein the business world have been eager to utilize techniques thatincrease
mindfulness in workers and managers. Studies of mindfulness in a business con-
text have shown that increases in mindfulness are associated with increased cre-
ativity and decreased burnout (e.g., Langer, Heffernan, & Kiester, 1988). A study
2 Langer and Moldoveanu
by Park conducted with businessmen in Korea found an increase in productivity as
well (Park, 1990). We anticipate that increased mindfulness will be shown to
decrease accidents as well, particularly when new technology is introduced. For
example, when many of us learned to drive, we were told to pump the brakes
slowly while trying to stop on a slippery surface. With the advent of antilock
brakes, however, the more appropriate response is to firmly press the brakes down
and hold them there. Thus, accidents that could be prevented in the past by our
learned behavior can now be caused by the same behavior. This is an example of
mindlessness that can easily occur in everyday life as well as the workplace.
Education is an area that often seems to abound in mindlessness. Many educa-
tional ramifications of mindfulness are reviewed in The Power of Mindful
Learning (Langer, 1997). Whether intending to learn an academic subject, a new
sport, or how to play a musical instrument, we often call upon mind-sets that ham-
per rather than help us to learn. 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 deter-
mined what the basics are. Surely, if women and men engage in the same sport, the
differences in their bodies should result in differences in how to play the game, for
example. Once we learn the basics mindlessly so that we no longer have to think
about them, we are not in a position to vary them readily as we get more informa-
tion about the task.
But there are relatively simple ways of reducing mindlessness in learning.
Several studies more fully described in Langer (1997) explored the ramification of
inducing mindful learning. In one study (Langer & Piper, 1987), mindfulness was
encouraged by introducing information about objects in a conditional way, using
language like “could be,” rather than the more traditional, absolute way (“is,” “can
onlybe”),which was defined as the mindless condition. Participants in the mindful
conditions were better able to use the objects creatively when the need for a novel
use of the object arose. In subsequent studies this work was extended to the intro-
duction of text in the same conditional manner. Here, the language that was used
consisted of expressions such as “could be,” “perhaps,” “from one perspective.”
Similar benefits accrued from the mindfulness treatments in these studies (e.g.,
Langer, Hatem, Joss, & Howell, 1989).
Attentional processes have been assumed to be central to learning. These have
alsobeenilluminated by mindfulness research. In one study (Langer, 1997) I asked
bothstudentsand teachers what they meant by paying attention. Interestingly, both
groups believed that this meant to “hold the image still as if focusing a camera.”
The problem, however, is that if one follows this instruction, it is very difficult to
stayattentive.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 mind-
fully notice new things about it, then attention improves. Moreover, such mindful
attention also results in a greater liking for the task and improved memory.
Construct of Mindfulness 3
Other mindful manipulations in the educational context have involved asking
students to make material more meaningful for themselves, compared to groups
asked to memorize it (Lieberman & Langer, 1997). The meaningful group retained
the information better and was able to utilize it in more creative ways in essays.
Adding perspective taking also elicits better performance (Lieberman & Langer,
1997). Consider the difference between introducing a history lesson as “Here are
the three reasons for the Civil War” versus “Here are three reasons for the Civil
War from the perspective of. . . .” The former presents the information as a closed
package; the latter invites further consideration of how the information might vary
from still other perspectives. Almost all of the facts most of us learned in school
were taught to us in a perspective-free way that encourages mindless use of the
information because it does not occur to us to question it again. In contrast, infor-
mation presented in the mindful, perspective-taking condition was learned better
by high school students, even though they had to deal with more information.
Clearly, mindful teaching practices can have a pronounced effect on student
learning.
Other areas currently being investigated through a mindfulness lens include
decision making (see Langer, 1994, for a theoretical review), evaluation, medita-
tion and Eastern religious practices, and emotion. The work described in the cur-
rent issue further demonstrates the breadth of application possibilities of this
construct, ranging from interaction with computers to understanding of mental
retardation.
Mindfulness, Cognition, and Computers
The question of how mindfulness relates to intelligence, cognitive abilities
and cognitive styles is considered in the issue’s next article, by Robert Sternberg.
Heconcludesthat although there is some overlap with other types of cognitive pro-
cesses, and it is most like the construct of cognitive style, the concept of mindful-
ness has some unique properties. We are not in complete agreement with his
conclusion that mindfulness is most like a cognitive style because, in our view, a
style is not expected to change over time and through different circumstances,
whereas the essence of mindfulness is change.
We prefer to consider the problem of the relation between mindfulness and
other types of cognitive processes in terms of whether something is reducible to an
algorithmfor processing information. Having a particular cognitive stylecannotbe
mindful,bydefinition,becauseitispreciselythesensitivityto the novel and, there-
fore, unexpected (i.e., nonalgorithmic) that is one of the key components of mind-
fulness. The French philosopher Giles Deleuze captured part of the spirit of
mindfulness when he wrote, “To the answer embedded in every question, answer
with a question from a different answer” (Deleuze & Guattari, 1980).
The algorithmic aspects of problem-solving behavior have been extensively
addressed by the literature on cognition and problem solving (Newell, 1990) and
4 Langer and Moldoveanu
this has had a major effect on cognitive psychology. Paradoxically, although this
early work established a whole new approach to the mapping of cognitive pro-
cesses, it also limited the scope of what a mind-mapping venture could look like.
The Simon-Newell paradigm (Newell, 1990) is based on what has been called
themind-as-computermetaphor(Gigerenzer&Goldstein,1996).Thecentraltenet
of this metaphor is that mental processes are nothing more than algorithmic pro-
cesses, or processes that can be simulated by general-purpose computational
devices, such as a digital computer. This central tenet is, by definition, irrefutable,
because it contains a set of cognitive commitments that we commonly use to refer
to a problem. According to this view, solving large arrays of linear equations is a
legitimateproblem and an adequate topic for the study of mental processes because
the answer is computable by a finite algorithm working on a finite-state computa-
tional device. Inventing a new topology for a space-time—as Einstein did—would
notbe a legitimate problem for this view(orwould be considered an ill-posed prob-
lem)because it is not susceptible to formulationasthe input to a finite-state compu-
tational device. Thus, the cognitive abilities scholar cannot account for acts of
creation of new concepts, even something like the general theory of relativity, that
have become new paradigms in their fields. In contrast, the student of mindfulness
focuses often on those particular cognitive processes that defy immediate algorith-
mic representation.
The phenomenon of mindfulness also has implications for the ways in which
weview and represent the mind and its connection to the brain. The “cognitive rev-
olution”has relied, as previously noted, on models of the human mind basedonthe
image of a computer or a generalized computational device. Most investigators in
this area (e.g., Churchland, 1987) have sought to explain mental processes by
reduction to computational or algorithmic processes that can be modeled using
sophisticated computer science representations. This reduction has recently been
extended to explaining mental phenomena in terms of neurobiological processes
taking place in the brain (e.g., Churchland, 1987), which can themselves be repre-
sented in computational terms. An epistemological problem, however, is that these
metaphoricaldevices cannot be transcended or refutedbyempirical means because
the organizing metaphors have never been explicitly made subject to empirical
investigation. All that investigations based on the mind-as-computer metaphor can
tell us is whether our problem-solving processes deviate from the normative pre-
cepts that make up the metaphor in question. Thus, we are not informed about the
possibly nonalgorithmic processes by which people come to solve the practical
problems that cognitive scientists expect them to solve by algorithmic means.
Mindfulness theorists are not alone in positing the importance of
nonalgorithmic factors in problem solving. Logician Kurt Godel wrote eloquently
about the incompleteness of any non-self-contradictory logic system (see Putnam,
1985). Because of this, we as a society are still trying, with little success, to build
robots that can navigate their way around a relatively uncrowded room and can
Construct of Mindfulness 5
resolveproblems like catching a ball that a child canresolve while riding a bicycle,
carrying on a conversation, and listening to his favorite tune on the radio. We
believe that the time to investigate the nonalgorithmic dimensions of thinking is
ripe, and the phenomena of mindful engagement can provide a portal to these rela-
tively unexplored dimensions.
Mindlessness as a Social Issue
Mindlessnesscan show up as the direct cause of human error in complex situa-
tions, of prejudice and stereotyping, and of the sensation of alternating between
anxietyand boredom that characterizes many lives. Boredom and malaise, particu-
larly, can be thought of as conditions brought on by mindlessness. Without notic-
ing differences brought on by the passage of time within ourselves and the outside
world, each day looks like every other. Students feel stuck and listless in the class-
room.Their teachers often absent-mindedly slog through long-winded lecturesand
sermons. Employees such as telephone operators, checkout clerks, and airline per-
sonnel often sleepwalk through their days, mechanically carrying out the tasks that
have been designed for them. The day when surgeons and airline pilots may check
out psychologically because of standardization and routinization of their work is
perhapsnot very far off, with potentially disastrous consequences. Already, human
error accounts for more casualties in the American military than does any actual
military conflict (Snook, 1996).
Social psychologists have provided many examples over the years of ways in
which collective choices regarding prejudice can become normative and destruc-
tive.Negative intergroup attitudes can also betheresult of mindless categorization.
When we do not stop drawing distinctions between people at some arbitrary point
(e.g., skin color or accent), and we keep on drawing distinctions (down to feeding
habits, music they listen to, or any of thousands of issues), then we may discover
that most stereotypes that we have formed are not rooted in fact, but in choice.
We believe that the findings of mindfulness research can help address these
various phenomena directly. The research presented in the current issue demon-
strates the many areas to which it is applicable.
Organization of the Issue
This issue brings together both theoretical and empirical work. In keeping
with the emphasis of the mindfulness research paradigm on the continuous
re-creation of new categories, the articles in this issue alternately delve into the
mindless phenomena of interactions between people and their environment and
review ways in which this continuous interaction can be made more mindful.
The article by Robert Sternberg is theoretical. It examines various possible
interpretationsof the concept of mindfulness as theyappearin the field of cognitive
6 Langer and Moldoveanu
psychology. Based upon this investigation, Sternberg concludes that mindfulness
cannot readily be absorbed into any of the existing categories—such as cognitive
style or capability—that have been traditionally operationalized in cognitive psy-
chology.His work encourages and stimulates new research aimed at clarifyingand
operationalizing mindfulness.
As noted, much of the research already conducted reveals the powerful effect
of mindfulness manipulations on creativity, attention, and learning. In the issue’s
third article, Ron Ritchhart and David Perkins take this work further by applying
mindful learning to a new content area, math, in a real-world setting. In their
research, they present the original information to be taught in a conditional form
and discover advantages associated with this type of educational practice.
The following article, by Christine Kawakami, Judith White, and Ellen
Langer, extends the concept of mindfulness to the personal characteristics and
gender roles enacted by women in the business world. As Langer (1989) noted,
mindfulness keeps us situated in the present. Because of this, a mindful individual
should be perceived as more genuine than a mindless individual, irrespective of
whether she behaves in a gender-traditional or non-gender-traditional way. The
authors present experimental evidence that suggests that mindfulness does lead to
audience reception of genuineness that increases positive affect and may override
negative gender biases of male observers.
StevenReiss next presents a review of research of both theoretical andempiri-
cal relevance. He reinterprets the construct of mindfulness as a combination of
highcuriosity with a low need for order. Hethendiscussesthe implications of these
ideas and shows how categories used for classifying mental retardation have
become more mindful over time. His article also has ramifications for childhood
education.
The following article, by Clifford Nass and Youngme Moon, considers how
people interact with computers. Their investigations argue that relationships with
computers are often mindless because machines are frequently treated as if they
were human. Individuals bring the same rules and expectations to bear when inter-
acting with computers as they do when interacting with people. These authors
review studies that show the ways in which we have “welcomed” computers and
made them part of our social environment by giving them personalities and human
characteristics.
Judee Burgoon, Charles Berger, and Vincent Waldron present research that
addresses the ways in which mindless behavior influences communicative prac-
tices. This mindlessness often results in misunderstandings, misconstruals, and
misperceptions among communicators who are individually under the impression
that they are engaged with one another in meaningful dialogue. These authors
explore ways in which increasing mindful awareness of one another can deepen
and broaden social understanding.
Construct of Mindfulness 7
The penultimate article, by the current authors, explores ways in which we
might consider both decreasing mindlessness and increasing mindfulness with
respect to three social concerns: demographic changes, the workplace, and prepar-
ingchildren for the high-tech world in which theylive.Theyexplore ways in which
loosening our cognitive commitments to certain stereotypes and archetypes can
stimulate personal development and increase the potential for interpersonal learn-
ing of the new age of broadband residential access and suggest extensions to the
research paths indicated by articles in the issue.
In the issue’s final article, Jack Demick reviews and summarizes the contribu-
tions of the articles in the issue. He argues that the construct of mindfulness can be
used as a unifying framework because of its applicability to many subfields in psy-
chology, including social, cognitive, and developmental. He also discusses the
contributions that mindfulness theory has made to a constructive reinterpretation
of many diverse social problems, such as the perpetuation of prejudice and stereo-
types and tensions within adoptive and foster families.
References
Alexander, C., Langer, E. J., Newman, R., Chandler, H., & Davies, J. (1989). Aging, mindfulness and
meditation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,57, 950–964.
Chanowitz, B., & Langer, E. J. (1981). Premature cognitive commitments. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,41, 1051–1063.
Churchland, P. (1987). Matter and consciousness: An introduction to the philosophy of mind. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press.
Czikszentmihalyi, M., & Czikszentmihalyi, I. S. (1988). Optimal experience. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1980). Capitalism and schizophrenia. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Geer, J. H., Davison, G. C., & Gatchel, R. (1970). Reduction of stress in humans through non-veridical
perceived control of aversive stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,16,
731–738.
Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. (1996). Mind as computer: Birth of a metaphor. Creativity Research
Journal,9(2–3).
Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Langer, E. J. (1994). The illusion of calculated decisions. In R. Schank and E. Langer (Eds.), Beliefs,
reasoning and decision making. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Langer, E. J. (1997). The power of mindful learning. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Langer, E. J., Beck, P., Janoff-Bulman, R., & Timko, C. (1984). The relationship between cognitive
deprivation and longevity in senile and non-senile elderly populations. Academic Psychology
Bulletin,6, 211–226.
Langer, E. J., & Bodner, T. (1995). Mindfulness and attention. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard Uni-
versity, Cambridge, MA.
Langer,E. J., Carson, S., &Shih, M.(in press). Sit still and pay attention?Journal ofAdult Development.
Langer,E. J., Blank, A., & Chanowitz, B.(1978). Themindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: The
role of “placebic” information in interpersonal interactions. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology,36, 635–642.
Langer,E. J.,Hatem, M.,Joss, J.,& Howell,M. (1989).Conditional teachingand mindfullearning: The
role of uncertainty in education. Creativity Research Journal,2, 139–159.
Langer, E. J., Heffernan, D., & Kiester, M. (1988). Reducing burnout in an institutional setting: An
experimental investigation. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
8 Langer and Moldoveanu
Langer,E., Janis, I., & Wolfer, J. A. (1975). Reduction of psychologicalstress insurgical patients.Jour-
nal of Experimental Social Psychology,11, 155–165.
Langer, E. J., & Piper, A. (1987). The prevention of mindlessness. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology,53, 280–287.
Levy,B., & Langer, E. J.(in press).Improving attention in older adults. Journal ofAdult Development.
Lieberman, M., & Langer, E. J. Mindfulness in the process of learning. In E. J. Langer (Ed.), The power
of mindful learning. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Minsky, M. (1981). The society of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Newell, A. (1990). Unified theories of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Putnam, H. (1985). Reflexive reflections. Erkenntnis,35(1).
Park, K.-r. (1990). An experimental study of theory-based team building intervention: A case of Korean
work groups. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Snook, S. (1996). The friendly fire shootdown over Northern Iraq. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
Snow, S., & Langer, E. J. (1997). Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
ELLEN J. LANGER is Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, where
shehas been a member of the faculty since 1977. Shetaught at the Graduate Center
of CUNY for 3 years after receiving her PhD from Yale University. Her most
recent books, Mindfulness and The Power of Mindful Learning, reveal her abiding
concern for the reciprocal and interactive nature of theory, research, and applica-
tion to social issues. She was awarded prizes for Distinguished Contribution to
Psychology in the Public Interest from the American Psychological Association
and Distinguished Contribution of Basic Science to Psychology from the Amer-
ican Association of Applied and Preventive Psychology.
MIHNEAMOLDOVEANUisAssistantProfessorofStrategicManagementatthe
University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management. He is studying the ways
in which people rationalize and justify their decisions, stories, and theories, and is
working on techniques for making people—and strategic managers in particular—
more conscious of their relationships with their own ideas. He is a member of
the American Economic Association, INFORMS, and the Philosophy of Science
Association.
Construct of Mindfulness 9
... 4). En este último aspecto pueden considerarse incluidas las diferentes modalidades de tratamiento e intervenciones basadas en este género de práctica, que se han implementado de manera exitosa en el ámbito clínico y en la educación, entre otros campos (Hervás et al., 2016;Langer y Moldoveanu, 2000;Soriano, Pérez-Fuentes, Molero-Jurado, Gázquez, Tortosa y González, 2020). ...
Article
Full-text available
El presente estudio tuvo como objetivo analizar la relación entre la atención plena disposicional y tres estilos de manejo de conflictos interpersonales (agresivo, pasivo y cooperativo), en adolescentes de secundaria. Se realizó un estudio con enfoque cuantitativo de tipo no experimental con diseño transversal y alcance correlacional. Participaron 120 estudiantes de un plantel de sostenimiento público ubicado en Guadalajara, Jalisco, México, con edades de 12 a 15 años, quienes respondieron el Cuestionario Conflictalk y el Inventario de Friburgo sobre Atención Plena, versión corta. Los resultados mostraron niveles moderados en el desarrollo de las variables estudiadas, así como una relación positiva entre el estilo cooperativo y la atención plena disposicional. Se discuten los resultados en el marco del interés que existe actualmente por la formación de competencias para el manejo constructivo de conflictos interpersonales de los adolescentes en el contexto escolar.
... Similarly, Ref. [49] found that mindfulness qualities are a trait phenomenon where people seem to have the same way of viewing their environment across time. Ref. [54] experimented by inducing instructional interventions to respondents, which prompted them to intentionally regulate their mode of thinking and thereby shift or switch from mindlessness to mindfulness. Ref. [55] mentioned that the MAAS lacks items distinctly measuring attention/awareness, but it measures the personality traits of an individual with a general tendency to carry out day-to-day activities mindlessly, which is the inherent tendency of the person. ...
Article
Full-text available
Research studies have established that mindfulness helps in psychological well-being, stress reduction, chronic pain management, behavioral therapy, and other areas including organizational development. Mindfulness often refers to a state of consciousness, but mindfulness can also be understood as a personality trait. State mindfulness is referred as the individual’s capacity to cultivate a particular state of mind during meditative practice. Traits are more permanent facets of personality characteristics that are difficult to change and likely have some basis in genetics. Few scholars have criticized meditative mindfulness as a trend and cautioned that organizations should carefully consider their goals before introducing meditative mindfulness training. This dichotomy has prompted us to review the literature and carry out a comparative analysis of two divergent measurement scales of mindfulness: the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) and Langer’s mindfulness/mindlessness scale. The MAAS is the most widely used mindfulness scale to measure mindfulness, and Langer’s scale measures mindfulness/mindlessness. We developed hypotheses relating Langer’s scale and the MAAS. Further, we studied whether there is any difference in mindfulness/mindlessness among business school students with an undergraduate background in engineering and nonengineering streams. Using a self-administered questionnaire, we measured the mindfulness levels of 221 MBA first- and second-year graduates and tested the hypothesis using partial least squares structural equations modeling (PLS-SEM). We found that Langer’s mindfulness/mindlessness scale was negatively associated with the MAAS. We did not find any effect of gender, education, and professional specializations on mindfulness.
... Therefore,we are missing the opportunity to notice new things, which is apart of being in the moment. Langer defines mindfulness as "a flexible state of mind in which we are actively engaged in the present, noticing new things and sensitive to context" (Langer & Moldoveanu, 2000). Langer explains that "if we commit ourselves to some established form of information and lock ourselves into a specific mode of thinking, it would deprive ourselves of seeking novel ways or alternative modes of thinking" (Langer, 1989). ...
Article
Full-text available
Olympic Studies: 26th International seminar on Olympic studies for postgraduate students Publisher: International Olympic Academy
... Mindfulness is defined as "the way people or organizations reflect, collect information, perceived the world around them, and are thus motivated to change their perspective under the current circumstances to achieve the desired outcome" [67]. Specifically, mindfulness refers to the psychological reflection of an individual's cognitive abilities to respond to internal or external stimuli [68,69]. Accordingly, Boyatzis contended that mindfulness refers to an individual's ability to sense the ongoing situation and its impact on sustainable environmental measures by analyzing internal or external factors [70]. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study primarily focused on the behavioral modifications among employees while keeping the contextual factors that enable them to strive for sustainable environmental performance in view. The aim of this research was to uncover the impact of GHRM practices on intrinsic motivation (IM), harmonious work passion (HWP), and sustainable environmental performance (SEP) in small and medium enterprises in Uzbekistan. Moreover, this study mainly investigated intrinsic motivation and harmonious work passion as potential mediators in the relationship between GHRM practices and sustainable environmental performance. Additionally, this study included green mindfulness as a moderator in the association between GHRM practices and mediators (i.e., intrinsic motivation and harmonious work passion). In total, 345 Uzbekistan employees from small and medium enterprises completed a survey. This study deployed the path-analytical approach by using Mplus 8.0. Our findings demonstrate that GHRM practices are positively associated with IM, HWP, and SEP. In addition, this research confirms that intrinsic motivation significantly mediates the relationship between GHRM practices and SEP. Consequently, harmonious work passion also significantly mediates the association between GHRM practices and SEP. Furthermore, this study shows that a high level of green mindfulness strengthens the direct effect of GHRM on IM and HWP, along with the indirect effect of GHRM practices on sustainable environmental performance. Indeed, investigating the associations among study variables via moderated mediation mechanisms remarkably contributes to the extant literature.
Chapter
The chapter focuses on bringing mindfulness into the parent-child relationship. The concept of mindfulness is discussed and its dimensions are examined as having an impact on effective parenting and a harmonious relationship between the parent and child. A model of mindful parenting emphasizing on the social context of parent-child relationship is described. The chapter highlights the significance of mindful parenting which includes being mindful to one's self as well as being mindful of the relationship between the parent and child, indicating a shift from doing mode to being mode. Thus, mindful parenting requires the parent to be mindful of the parent-child relationship itself rather than considering parenting as a task to be carried out and just doing or acting in this relationship. Infusing mindfulness into the dynamics of the parent-child relationship will usher in the well-being of both child and parent.
Article
Full-text available
Mindfulness, achieved without meditation, is discussed with particular reference to learning. Being mindful is the simple act of drawing novel distinctions. It leads us to greater sensitivity to context and perspective, and ultimately to greater control over our lives. When we engage in mindful learning, we avoid forming mind-sets that unnecessarily limit us. Many of our beliefs about learning are mind-sets that have been mindlessly accepted to be true. Consideration is given to some of the consequences that result from a mindful reconsideration of those myths of learning.
Article
Full-text available
Conducted 3 field experiments to test the hypothesis that complex social behavior that appears to be enacted mindfully instead may be performed without conscious attention to relevant semantics. 200 Ss in compliance paradigms received communications that either were or were not semantically sensible, were or were not structurally consistent with their previous experience, and did or did not request an effortful response. It was hypothesized that unless the communication occasioned an effortful response or was structurally (rather than semantically) novel, responding that suggests ignorance of relevant information would occur. The predictions were confirmed for both oral (Exp I) and written communications (Exps II and III). Social psychological theories that rely on humans actively processing incoming information are questioned. (19 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Most people can draw on vast categories of stored information when explicitly asked to do so. The spontaneous, creative, mindful use of previously learned information, however, tends to be atypical. Three studies were designed to assess whether the manner in which information is initially presented affects how such information will subsequently be used, that is, in a mindful or mindless way. More specifically, two experiments (one with children, the other with college students) were conducted to compare the effects of a conditional versus absolute form of teaching upon creativity. Results revealed that instruction presented in an absolute manner resulted in mindless use of the information for both age groups. In contrast, subjects who were taught in a conditional way were better able to creatively deal with the information. For the college students, this finding was obtained even when the absolute learning condition was concerned with theoretical (i.e., conditional) information. In a third experiment, student teachers were taught conditionally or unconditionally in a confident or unconfident manner. Results indicated that confident but conditional instruction was most effective in provoking subsequent mindfulness.
Article
This study assesses the effectiveness of two stress-reducing strategies in a field setting. The first strategy consists of a coping device which entails the cognitive reappraisal of anxiety-provoking events, calming self-talk, and cognitive control through selective attention. The second strategy consists of supplying information about the threatening event along with reassurances for the purpose of producing emotional inoculation. Patients about to undergo major surgery were exposed to either the coping device, the preparatory information, both strategies, or neither. The prediction that the coping device would effectively reduce both pre- and post-operative stress was confirmed. An analysis of the nurses' ratings of preoperative stress showed a significant main effect for the coping device. There was also a significant main effect for the coping device on postoperative measures (number of pain relievers requested and proportion of patients requesting sedatives). The preparatory information, however, did not produce any significant effects on these postoperative measures.
Article
We conducted three experiments to assess the hypothesis that mindlessness could be prevented with a simple linguistic variation. Subjects in the first two experiments were either introduced to new objects conditionally (e.g., this could be an X) or unconditionally (e.g., this is an X), and the objects used were either unfamiliar or familiar. In each study a different need was then generated for which the object in question was not explicitly suited but could fulfill. Only those subjects in the conditional-unfamiliar group gave the creative response and met the need. When subjects were asked explicitly to generate novel uses for the target items, they had no difficulty doing so. However, given the way we are traditionally taught, it simply does not occur to us to think creatively unless explicitly instructed to do so. In the third experiment we introduced an unfamiliar item in one of three ways. In addition to the groups used in the earlier experiments, we added a group that was led to believe that the object was identifiable (unconditional) but was currently unknown. We also added a second need to determine whether the original conditional group truly learned conditionally or if they were in search of an absolute understanding of the target object. Significantly more of the subjects in the conditional group gave the creative response to both needs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)