Center for Healthy Minds, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2018 Jan;13(1):62-65. doi: 10.1177/1745691617718358. Epub 2017 Oct 10.
Van Dam et al. raise a number of critical issues in contemporary research on mindfulness and meditation and offer a prescriptive agenda for future work in this area. While we agree with all of the key points made in their article, there are a number of important issues omitted that are central to a comprehensive agenda for future research in this area. This commentary highlights five key points: (a) Many of the key methodological issues the article raises are not specific to research on mindfulness; (b) contemplative practices are varied, and the landscape of modern scientific research has evolved to focus almost exclusively on one or two types of practice to the exclusion of other forms of practice that are potentially highly impactful;
范达姆等人提出了当代正念和冥想研究中的一些关键问题,并为该领域的未来工作提出了一个规范性议程。虽然我们同意他们文章中的所有要点,但有一些重要的问题被遗漏了,这些问题对于该领域未来研究的综合议程至关重要。本评论强调了五个关键点:(a)该文章提出的许多关键方法问题不仅限于正念研究;(b)沉思实践是多种多样的,现代科学研究的格局已经发展到几乎只关注一种或两种实践,而排除了其他可能具有高度影响力的实践形式;