You might find this reserach interesting which suggests that CBT might reduce mindfulness.http://www.innate-intelligence.com.au/blog/?p=394

There is also this reserach that suggests than mindfulness decreases amygdala activity http://www.innate-intelligence.com.au/blog/?p=87

Wayne

as another example, I’ve been pondering the idea that maybe cognitive restructuring (Beckian and Albert Ellis A-B-C approach; the similar thought discussed in Learned Optimism) and related exercises (see Adrian Wells’ ideas on meta-cognitions in anxiety and mood disorders) can be reconciled with mindfulness. This runs counter to what many scientists are stating in articles and books. After all, we ebb and flow out of states of mindfulness. Maybe the act of recognizing the potential costs and benefits of a situation and clarifying the silliness of a situation or our efficacy in similar situations facilitates a greater density of mindful states during the next activity. It’s a testable hypothesis that simply requires ecological momentary assessments. I’m hoping one of my students grabs this idea and runs with it….or this post will inspire someone else as I am at capacity right now.

cheers,
Todd

You might find this interesting. When I’m coaching my clients, and there HRV scores aren’t going as well as they should (indicating that their thoughts have a negative emotional tone), I often ask them to say to themselves one of the words “curious, interesting or accept” and then gently let the thought go. It seems to work. I think it would be an interesting study to explore the relationship between accepting, opennness and curiosity. Are they different dimensions? Does one mediate the others?

Mindfulness can be defined as focusing one’s attention on present moment experience with an attitude of openness and curiosity (Bishop et al., 2004; Kashdan, 2009).

found this definition of mindfulness that seems to accomodate both our perspectives –

“a mental state of relaxed awareness of the present moment, marked by openness and curiosity toward your feelings rather than judgments of them”

JC’s an ozzie isn’t he? – must be something about ozzies and acceptance.

Enjoy

I am pretty well-versed in the ACT literature. You can decide for yourself by reading the theoretical frameworks in my papers (some of my collaborators authored important ACT books: John Forsyth, Joseph Ciarrochi, etc.). Of note, there is no evidence that I know of from the ACT world showing that quality of attention is more important than the self-regulation of attention. In fact, you rarely see this breakdown when mindfulness is being discussed. The literature with the most attention to this distinction is motivational interviewing.

I am curious as to how you use HRV in your coaching? From my understanding, the latest evidence suggests that HRV is a physiological measure of self-regulatory capacity. Is using this information different than people using self-monitoring and biofeedback techniques? If so, how? I am naive and honestly interested.

cheers,
Todd

There is also a growing body of research on ACT

Check out Personality and Individual Differences
Volume 46, Issue 2, January 2009, Pages 224-230 as an example.

By the way I use HRV software in my coaching and have found that when people are curious about something they tend to have higher levels of HRV. Check ou my website for some research on HRV http://www.innate-intelligence.com.au/blog/?cat=18

Again an emperical observation from my coaching is that people who learn mindfulness tend to become more curious