70 • PART II: MINDFULNESS IN EDUCATING FOR SELF-REGULATION AND ENGAGEMENT
pursues the path of big /M/ Mindfulness (Shapiro & Carlson, 2009). Some suggest
that mindfulness may be an antidote to consumerism, messages from the media, and
social media pressures and influences (e.g., Cook-Cottone, 2015; Rosenberg, 2004). This
contention has been supported by reviews of the literature that indicate that mindful-
ness has been associated with well-being, voluntary simplicity, and a lifestyle shaped
around intrinsically satisfying pursuits and expressions of self, away from material goals
(Brown & Kasser, 2005). In other words, mindfulness has been associated with a healthy,
internal sense of self.
Mindfulness as a Trait
Second, mindfulness is sometimes operationalized as a stable mental trait that can be
measured by scales assessing disposition (Lutz et al., 2015). This can be problematic, as even
those who study mindfulness as a trait do so within the context of measuring mindfulness
with trained practitioners, suggesting that skill acquisition is involved (see Lutz et al. [2015]
for a review). Further, given the current state of the research in this area, outcomes based on
trait measures are difficult to interpret. In their review, Lutz et al. (2015) cite contradictory
findings in studies that use trait mindfulness measures. They also note that studies using
self-reported, trait mindfulness measures as an outcome of a mindfulness intervention does
little to inform the field of mechanisms of action or shifts in clinical vulnerabilities, cogni-
tive, affective, or social outcomes that might also be affected by the training (Lutz et al.,
2015). Accordingly, the view is that mindfulness as a trait does not have empirical or theo-
retical support at this time.
Mindfulness as a Cognitive Process
Last, mindfulness is used as a term that describes a core cognitive process that is cultivated
via various mindfulness-based practices (Lutz et al., 2015). Mindfulness is a particular
way of paying attention in the present moment (Felver, Doerner, Jones, Kaye, & Merrell,
2013; Lutz et al., 2015; Weare, 2013; Zenner et al., 2014). Lutz et al. (2015) argue that there
are shared contextual features across mindfulness practices. For instance, some physical
postures are believed to be more conducive to cultivating mindfulness during formal
meditation than others (Lutz et al., 2015). Another feature is a nonaversive affective tone
(Lutz et al., 2015). This has been operationalized as an accepting, friendly, kind, com-
passionate, and even loving affective tone (Lutz et al., 2015). Also, most mindfulness
practices share a goal or motivation to reduce suffering (Lutz et al., 2015). It is important
to note that this conceptualization of mindfulness can be subtly different depending on
the tradition or practice used or studied (e.g., Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction or
Transcendental Meditation; Lutz et al., 2015). As such, differences in conceptualization,
even if they are small, as well as the use of a broad conceptualization of mindfulness,
can affect the ability to formulate mechanistic hypotheses in research and practice (Lutz
et al., 2015). When referring to mindfulness as a cognitive process, researchers and prac-
titioners are typically referring to the following aspects of the term: (a) present moment
awareness, (b) bare attention, (c) release of judgment, and (d) the focus of attention
(see Figure 4.1).