Dispositional mindfulness, alexithymia and sensory processing: Emerging insights from habituation of the acoustic startle reflex response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is growing evidence of beneficial effects of mindfulness developed through engaging in mindfulness training/practices on sensory and cognitive processing, emotion regulation and mental health. Mindfulness has also been conceptualised as a dispositional 'trait', i.e. the naturally-occurring ability of meditation-naïve individuals to display, in varying degree, a non-judgmental non-reactive present-moment awareness in everyday life. In this study we examined possible associations between dispositional mindfulness, alexithymia and sensory processing. Eye-blink startle responses to acoustic stimuli of varying intensity [90-dB or 100-dB over 70-dB (A) background] were assessed in 26 meditation-naïve adults (50 % men) using electromyographic recordings of the orbicularis muscle. All participants completed the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire and the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale. A negative association was found between dispositional mindfulness and alexithymia (r = -0.513). There was stronger startle habituation to 100-dB, compared to 90-dB probes. Stronger startle habituation (larger negative habitation slope values) to 100-dB probes was significantly associated with higher dispositional mindfulness (r = -0.528) and with lower alexithymia at trend level (r = 0.333). As indicated by commonality analysis, 10.6 % of explained variance in habituation (100-dB probes) was common to both alexithymia and mindfulness, 17.3 % was unique to mindfulness, but alexithymia made negligible unique contribution (0.5 %). These findings indicate similar startle habituation pattern in people with a high level of dispositional mindfulness to that reported previously by Antonova et al. (2015) in people with moderate mindfulness meditation practice intensity. Future studies should investigate the mechanisms, such as interoceptive awareness, that might underly these relationships.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".