MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W184545122

The Science of Meditation: From Mysticism to Mainstream Western Psychology

2012· dissertation· en· W184545122 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jennifer Christine Pevreal

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Commons (University of Waikato) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicParanormal Experiences and Beliefs
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Medical AssociationAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMeditationMysticismMainstreamPsychologyEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychoanalysisTheology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychological applications of meditative practice have become the ‘third-wave’ tools in the psychology clinician’s therapeutic tool kit. Meditation techniques for numerous psychological disorders, as well as the psychological impacts of chronic medical conditions, are being used by a growing number of mainstream clinicians in Western healthcare contexts, which were previously the domain of alternative practitioners, and formerly the sometimes secretive and mysterious domain of the orthodox and esoteric spiritual traditions. Many questions arise regarding how this conversion has taken place and why. This thesis explores some of the issues surrounding the adoption, reduction, and application of meditation practices from the Eastern and Western origins and transmission to mainstream Western healthcare contexts. By tracing the history of the rise in popularity of meditation in the mainstream Western health sciences, particularly within the mental health sector over the past century or so, it is intended to contribute to an answer to, in part, the question of ‘why’ and, in part, the question of ‘how’. A further question of whether sufficient cognizance has been taken of the subjective experiences and understandings of long-term meditation practitioners and what they can contribute to Western psychological understanding of meditation—its application potentials and pitfalls—is explored. Why is this important? At present, being intelligent, and highly trained, as most clinicians have come to believe they are, it has become somewhat taken for granted that reading journal articles or books on meditation, and attending a workshop or two, perhaps even a week-long residential training retreat, qualifies one to begin using meditation processes with clients. However, is clinician training and competency in the use of meditation currently sufficient to ensure its safe and appropriate use, particularly for psychologically impaired clients, given the phenomena reported by long-term meditators and the judicious preparatory processes required by teachers in the wisdom traditions of origin? Using qualitative methodology and a social constructionist viewing lens, I elucidate whether Western psychology’s reductive approach may create barriers to the growth of a knowledge-field of the potential of meditation for personal and collective development and wellbeing—which has existed since antiquity, but which current psychological interest indicates is by no means antiquated. Twenty three semi-guided indepth interviews were conducted with 18 long-term meditators from diverse backgrounds and nationalities, to explore their subjective experiences—the phenomena they encountered and the meanings they ascribed to their meditation practices. What became apparent through the course of this research was the divergence that exists between the positivist Western scientific literature on meditation and the experiences and understandings of this sample of meditators. The implications that arise from a paradigm clash between the fundamental premises of a positivist approach to a Western science of meditation for the healthcare sector and those of the wisdom traditions of origin are discussed. Finally, potential paths of resolution to enable contributions to the development of a knowledge-field of meditation for Western healthcare contexts from the understandings and technologies of both ways of knowing are mooted.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.026
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Commons (University of Waikato)Same topicParanormal Experiences and BeliefsFrench-language works237,207