Advertisement

Mindfulness

, Volume 10, Issue 11, pp 2452–2467 | Cite as

Cross-Fertilizing Qualitative Perspectives on Effects of a Mindfulness-Based Intervention: An Empirical Comparison of Four Methodical Approaches

  • Pascal FrankEmail author
  • Laura Stanszus
  • Daniel Fischer
  • Klara Kehnel
  • Paul Grossman
ORIGINAL PAPER

Abstract

Objectives

Qualitative methods come along with specific methodological backgrounds and related empirical strengths and weaknesses. Research is lacking addressing the question of what it precisely means to study mindfulness practices from a particular methodological point of view. The aim of this paper is to shed light on what qualities of mindfulness different qualitative methods can elucidate.

Methods

Based on interviews stemming from participants of a consumer-focused mindfulness training (BiNKA), we undertook a comparison of four different analyses, namely content analysis (CA), grounded theory (GT), interpretative-phenomenological analysis (IPA), and discourse analysis (DA).

Results

Independently applying the four methods on our data material led to the following findings: CA demonstrated that the training had effects on self-awareness, well-being, and the development of ethical qualities and influenced pre-consumptive stages of participants; GT revealed the complex set of conditions determining whether and how the mindfulness training influenced the attendees; IPA highlighted the subjectivity of the mindfulness experience, suggesting that (1) different training elements have varying effects on participants and (2) it is often not the meditation practice, but other course elements that cause the effects experienced by the attendees; DA demonstrated that the course experience was influenced by subjective theories held by the participants. In particular, they showed typical strategies of rationalizing their consumption.

Conclusions

A pluralistic qualitative research assists in identifying blind spots and limitations of a single method, increases the self-reflexivity, and helps to arrive at a more comprehensive understanding of mindfulness practice or other processes of covert lived experience.

Keywords

Mindfulness Qualitative Pluralistic qualitative research Reflexive methodology Sustainable consumption 

Notes

Authors’ Contributions

PF: designed and executed the study, coordinated and participated in the data analyses, and wrote the paper. LS: co-designed and co-executed the study, participated in the data analyses and wrote the sub-sections on qualitative content analysis, DF: co-designed the study and participated in writing the paper, KK: undertook the DA analysis, wrote the corresponding sub-sections and supported in formatting the manuscript, PG: supervised the execution the study and the data analysis and participated in writing the paper. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript for submission.

Funding Information

The present study has been made possible through funding received from the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) in the project BiNKA (Education for Sustainable Consumption through Mindfulness Training) under grants 01UT1416 and 01UT1416B.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study before their inclusion in the study.

References

  1. Allen, M., Bromley, A., Kuyken, W. & Sonnenberg, S.J. (2009). Participants’ experiences of mindfulness based cognitive therapy: “It changed me in just about every way possible”. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 37, 413–430.Google Scholar
  2. Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2017). Reflexive methodology. New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bannirchelvam, B., Bell, K. L., & Costello, S. (2017). A qualitative exploration of primary school students’ experience and utilisation of mindfulness. Contemporary School Psychology, 21(4), 304–316.Google Scholar
  4. Bergomi, C., Tschacher, W., & Kupper, Z. (2013). The assessment of mindfulness with self-report measures: Existing scales and open issues. Mindfulness, 4(3), 191–202.Google Scholar
  5. Birrer, D., Röthlin, P., & Morgan, G. (2012). Mindfulness to enhance athletic performance: Theoretical considerations and possible impact mechanisms. Mindfulness, 3(3), 235–246.Google Scholar
  6. Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., Segal, Z. V., Abbey, S., Speca, M., Velting, D. & Devins, G. (2004). Mindfulness: A Proposed Operational Definition. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241Google Scholar
  7. Black, D. S., & Slavich, G. M. (2016). Mindfulness meditation and the immune system: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1373, 13–24.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Bodhi, B. (2013). What does mindfulness really mean? A canonical perspective. In J. M. G. Williams & J. Kabat-Zinn (Eds.), Mindfulness. Diverse perspectives on its meaning, origins and applications (pp. 19–39). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Bühlmayer, L., Birrer, D., Röthlin, P., Faude, O., & Donath, L. (2017). Effects of mindfulness practice on performance-relevant parameters and performance outcomes in sports: A meta-analytical review. Sports Medicine, 47(11), 2309–2321.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., & Smith, A. P. (2007). Why people don’t take their concerns about fair trade to the supermarket: The role of neutralisation. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(1), 89–100.Google Scholar
  11. Chavez, C. (2008). Conceptualizing from the inside: Advantages, complications, and demands on insider positionality. The Qualitative Report, 13(3), 474–494.Google Scholar
  12. Christopher, J. C., Chrisman, J. A., Trotter-Mathison, M. J., Schure, M. B., Dahlen, P., & Christopher, B. (2011). Perceptions of the long-term influence of mindfulness training on counselors and psychotherapists: A qualitative inquiry. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 51(3), 318–349.Google Scholar
  13. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques to developing grounded theory (3rd Ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Deady, R. (2011). Reading with methodological perspective bias: A journey into classic grounded theory. Grounded Theory Review, 1(10).Google Scholar
  15. Didonna, F. (Ed.). (2009). Clinical handbook of mindfulness. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Eberth, J., & Sedlmeier, P. (2012). The effects of mindfulness meditation: A meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 3(3), 174–189.Google Scholar
  17. Fischer, D., Stanszus, L., Geiger, S., Grossman, P., & Schrader, U. (2017). Mindfulness and sustainable consumption: A systematic literature review of research approaches and findings. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 544–558.Google Scholar
  18. Frank, P. (2017). Warum wir Tiere essen (obwohl wir sie mögen) – sozialpsychologische Erklärungsansätze für das Fleischparadox. In J. Straub, & P.S. Ruppel (Ed.), Kerosinfrei und vegan: das ökologische Selbst. Psychosozial, 40(2), 1–21.Google Scholar
  19. Fritzsche, J., Fischer, D., Böhme, T., & Grossman, P. (2018). Education for sustainable consumption through mindfulness. Images and objects - active methodology toolkit 9. Hedmark, PERL – Partnership for Education and Research about Responsible Living.Google Scholar
  20. Frost, N. (Ed.) (2011). Qualitative methods in psychology: Combining Core approaches. Open University Press. Google Scholar
  21. Frost, N. (2016). Practising research. Roulston: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  22. Garland, E., & Gaylord, S. (2009). Envisioning a future contemplative science of mindfulness: Fruitful methods and new content for the next wave of research. Complementary Health Practice Review, 14(1), 3–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Geiger, S., Fischer, D., & Schrader, U. (2017). Measuring what matters in sustainable consumption: An integrative framework for the selection of relevant behaviors. Sustainable Development, 26(1), 18–33.Google Scholar
  24. Germer, C. K., Siegel, R. D., & Fulton, P. R. (Eds.). (2016). Mindfulness and psychotherapy (2nd Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  25. Goulding, C. (2005). Grounded theory, ethnography and phenomenology. A comparative analysis of three qualitative strategies for marketing research. European Journal of Marketing, 39(3/4), 294–308.Google Scholar
  26. Goyal, M., Singh, S., Sibinga, E. M. S., Gould, N. F., Rowland-Seymour, A., Sharma, R., & Shihab, H. M. (2014). Meditation programs for psychological stress and well-being. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(3), 357–368.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Groeben, N., Wahl, D., Schlee, J., & Scheele, B. (1988). Das Forschungsprogramm Subjektive Theorien. Eine Einführung in die Psychologie des reflexiven Subjektes. Tübingen: Francke.Google Scholar
  28. Grossman, P. (2008). On measuring mindfulness in psychosomatic and psychological research. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 64, 405–408.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Grossman, P. (2015). Mindfulness: Awareness informed by an embodied ethic. Mindfulness, 6(1), 17–22.Google Scholar
  30. Grossman, P. (2019). On the porosity of subject and object in “mindfulness” scientific study: Challenges to “scientific” construction, operationalization and measurement of mindfulness. Current Opinion in Psychology, 28, 102–107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Haydicky, J., Wiener, J., & Shecter, C. (2017). Mechanisms of action in concurrent parent-child mindfulness training: A qualitative exploration. Mindfulness, 8(4), 1018–1035.Google Scholar
  32. Herbrik, R., & Kanter, H. (2016). Nachhaltigkeit - eine mächtige, normative, soziale Fiktion. Swissfuture, 43(1), 12–13.Google Scholar
  33. Hill, C. L. M., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Mindfulness and its relationship to emotional regulation. Emotion, 12(1), 81–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Himmelstein, S., Hastings, A., Shapiro, S., & Heery, M. (2012). A qualitative investigation of the experience of a mindfulness-based intervention with incarcerated adolescents. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 17(4), 231–237.Google Scholar
  35. Hugh-Jones, S., Rose, S., Koutsopoulou, G.Z., & Simms-Ellis, R. (2017). How is stress reduced by a workplace mindfulness intervention? A qualitative study conceptualising experiences of change. Mindfulness, 474-487.Google Scholar
  36. Hyland, T. (2017). McDonaldizing spirituality: Mindfulness, education, and consumerism. Journal of Transfomative Education, 15(4), 334–356.Google Scholar
  37. Ie, A., Ngnoumen, C. T., & Langer, E. J. (2014). The Wiley Blackwell handbook of mindfulness. New Jersey: Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. Jha, A. P., Morrison, A. B., Dainer-Best, J., Parker, S., Rostrup, N., & Stanley, E. A. (2015). Minds “at attention”: Mindfulness training curbs attentional lapses in military cohorts. PLoS One, 10(2), 1–19.Google Scholar
  39. Kabat-Zinn, J. (1991). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain and illness. New York: Delta.Google Scholar
  40. Keller, R. (2011). The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD). Human Studies, 34(1), 43–65.Google Scholar
  41. Keller, R., Hornidge, A.-K., & Schünemann, W. J. (Eds.). (2018). The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse: Investigating the politics of knowledge and meaning-making. London, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  42. Kerr, C. E., Josyula, K., & Littenberg, R. (2011). Developing an observing attitude: An analysis of meditation diaries in an MBSR clinical trial. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 18(1), 80–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Klöckner, C. A., & Matthies, E. (2004). How habits interfere with norm-directed behaviour: A normative decision-making model for travel mode choice. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(3), 319–327.Google Scholar
  44. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative text analysis (1st Ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  45. Levesque, C., & Brown, K. W. (2007). Mindfulness as a moderator of the effect of implicit motivationalself-concept on day-to-day behavioral motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 31(4), 284–299.Google Scholar
  46. Luberto, C. M., Shinday, N., Song, R., Philpotts, L. L., Park, E. R., Fricchione, G. L., & Yeh, G. Y. (2017). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of meditation on empathy, compassion, and prosocial behaviors. Mindfulness, 9(3), 708–724.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. Malis, F. R., Meyer, T., & Gross, M. M. (2017). Effects of an antenatal mindfulness-based childbirth and parenting programme on the postpartum experiences of mothers: A qualitative interview study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 17(1), 57–68.Google Scholar
  48. Malpass, A., Carel, H., Ridd, M., Shaw, A., Kessler, D., Sharp, D., Bowden, M., & Wallond, J. (2011). Transforming the perceptual situation: A meta-ethnography of qualitative work reporting patients‘ experiences of mindfulness-based approaches. Mindfulness, 3(1), 60–75.Google Scholar
  49. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 1(2).Google Scholar
  50. Mayring, P., Huber, G. L., Gürtler, L., & Kiegelmann, M. (2007). Mixed methodology in psychological research. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  51. Mehra, B. (2002). Bias in qualitative research: Voices from online classroom. The Qualitative Report, 7(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  52. Morse, J. M., & Chung, S. E. (2003). Toward holism: The significance of methodological pluralism. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), 13–20.Google Scholar
  53. Nightingale, A. J. (2016). Adaptive scholarship and situated knowledges? Hybrid methodologies and plural epistemologies in climate change adaptation research. Area, 48(1), 41–47.Google Scholar
  54. Norris, N. (1997). Error, bias and validity in qualitative research. Educational Action Research, 5(1), 172–176.Google Scholar
  55. Nowogrodzki, A. (2016). Power of positive thinking skews mindfulness studies trials of mindfulness to improve mental health selectively report positive results. Nature.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.19776.
  56. Petticrew, M., Egan, M., Thomas, H., Hamilton, V., Kunkler, R., & Roberts, H. (2008). Publication bias in qualitative research: What becomes of qualitative research presented at conference? Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 62, 552–554.Google Scholar
  57. Pietkiewicz, I., & Smith, J. A. (2012). A practical guide to using interpretative phenomenological analysis in qualitative research psychology. Czasopismo Psychologiczne, 18(2), 361–369.Google Scholar
  58. Schellekens, M. P., Jansen, E. T., Willemse, H. H., van Laarhoven, H. W., Prins, J. B., & Speckens, A. E. (2016). A qualitative study on mindfulness-based stress reduction for breast cancer patients: How women experience participating with fellow patients. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24, 1813–1820.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Roeser, R. W. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of mindfulness in education. Integrating theory and research into practice. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  60. Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  61. Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 53–80). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  62. Stanszus, L., Fischer, D., Böhme, T., Frank, P., Fritzsche, J., Geiger, S., Schrader, U. (2017). Education for sustainable consumption through mindfulness training: Development of a consumption-specific intervention. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 19(1), 5-21.  https://doi.org/10.1515/jtes-2017-0001.Google Scholar
  63. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  64. Sweeney, T.B. (2016). A convergent parallel mixed-methods investigation into the role of mindfulness in moderate to severe, persistent depression. PhD thesis. University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
  65. Vago, D. R. (2014). Mapping modalities of self-awareness in mindfulness practice: A potential mechanism for clarifying habits of mind. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1307, 28–42.Google Scholar
  66. Valerio, A. (2016). Owning mindfulness: A bibliometric analysis of mindfulness literature trends within and outside of buddhist contexts. Contemporary Buddhism, 17, 157–183.Google Scholar
  67. Van Dam, N., van Vugt, M., Vago, D. R., Schmalzl, L., Saron, C. D., Olendzki, A., Meissner, T., Lazar, S. W., Kerr, C. E., Gorchov, J., Fox, K. C., Field, B. A., Britton, W. B., Brefczynski-Lewis, J., & Meyer, D. E. (2018). Mind the hype: A critical evaluation and prescriptive agenda for research on mindfulness and meditation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(1), 36–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Williams, M. J., McManus, F., Muse, K., & Williams, J. M. G. (2011). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for severe health anxiety (hypochondriasis): An interpretative phenomenological analysis of patients’ experiences. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 50, 379–397.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Zenner, C., Herrnleben-Kurz, S., & Walach, H. (2014). Mindfulness-based interventions in schools - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(603), 1–12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leuphana University LüneburgLüneburgGermany
  2. 2.Technische Universität BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  4. 4.University Zurich/SwitzerlandZurichSwitzerland
  5. 5.European Center for MindfulnessFreiburgGermany

Personalised recommendations