<p>This article presents a conceptual analysis of mindfulness as a cultural–psychological boundary object, examining how contemporary psychological deployments diverge from early Buddhist frameworks. Treating Buddhist psychology as a coherent theoretical framework, the analysis traces how dominant psychological definitions increasingly classify mindfulness through outcome-based criteria. At the same time, ethical orientation, investigative function, and liberation-oriented purpose recede into the background. Using a conceptual and genealogical approach, the paper synthesizes literature from early Buddhist sources, historical analyses of Buddhist modernism, psychological measurement research, and studies of XR-based mindfulness interventions. Rather than evaluating intervention efficacy, it examines how assumptions about attention, embodiment, and purpose shape the formation and validation of constructs. The analysis supports a pluri-epistemic approach to psychological science that foregrounds epistemic lineage and construct transparency, clarifying the trade-offs involved in abstraction, measurement, and scalability.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

The Psychological Reconstruction of Mindfulness: From Buddhist Origins to Modern Operationalization

  • Sarah A. Barker

摘要

This article presents a conceptual analysis of mindfulness as a cultural–psychological boundary object, examining how contemporary psychological deployments diverge from early Buddhist frameworks. Treating Buddhist psychology as a coherent theoretical framework, the analysis traces how dominant psychological definitions increasingly classify mindfulness through outcome-based criteria. At the same time, ethical orientation, investigative function, and liberation-oriented purpose recede into the background. Using a conceptual and genealogical approach, the paper synthesizes literature from early Buddhist sources, historical analyses of Buddhist modernism, psychological measurement research, and studies of XR-based mindfulness interventions. Rather than evaluating intervention efficacy, it examines how assumptions about attention, embodiment, and purpose shape the formation and validation of constructs. The analysis supports a pluri-epistemic approach to psychological science that foregrounds epistemic lineage and construct transparency, clarifying the trade-offs involved in abstraction, measurement, and scalability.