The distinction is made between Buddhist Psychology vs. viewing Buddhism as a Psychology. A case is made against viewing Buddhism as a psychology and some of the theoretical pitfalls and clinical dangers of doing so are identified. Conversely, we will also explore the merits of Buddhist Psychology and the important contributions it has thus far made within the field of cognitive psychology, positive psychology, and transpersonal psychology.
Reports from my literature review of nearly a thousand mindfulness-based research articles since the 1960s shows three genres within meditation research: a scientistic approach, an ethnographic approach, and a context-mapping approach. I discuss these three genres and propose that they may be used as potentially useful organizing tools to help sift through the ongoing explosion of research within the field. Lastly, I discuss the particular significance of context mapping as a means by which alternative paradigms such as Buddhism may be integrated within the mainstream.
The meaning and importance of metacognition as a conceptual construct in meditation research is presented. Important differences between ‘metacognitive awareness’, ‘metacognitive knowledge’, and ‘metacognitive insight’ are discussed with an aim to identify where in the research these concepts are being confused and used interchangably and the importance of maintaining a clear distinction between these terms.