Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.
Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.
Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.
Login
Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.
This study aimed to analyze the relationship between mindfulness and Stoic attitudes by exploring their unexamined similarities. Moreover, it sought to develop a new tool for assessing Stoic attitudes with a broader scope than previous measures.
Method
A total of 437 individuals participated in the initial survey, and 347 were re-surveyed after 2 weeks. Participants completed the newly developed 100-I-K questionnaire and an additional scale to measure mindfulness. The follow-up sample completed the 100-I-K scale, Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory, Pathak-Wieten Stoicism Ideology Scale, and a control question. The participants were recruited through an online Computer Assisted Web Interviewing survey panel as a representative sample.
Results
A strong positive correlation was found between mindfulness and Stoic attitude in both the first (r = 0.65) and second (r = 0.63) measurements. A weak, yet statistically significant relationship was observed between 100-I-K scores and understanding of the Stoicism ideology in the first measurement (r = 0.19) and follow-up sample (r = 0.21). Moreover, Stoic attitude correlated with subjective declarations of adopting Stoic attitudes (r = − 0.19 and r = − 0.18 in both samples).
Conclusions
The results confirmed the relationship between Stoic attitudes and mindfulness, suggesting similarities between Eastern and Western traditions. The 100-I-K questionnaire needs further development; however, it demonstrated the potential to assess the overall Stoic attitude. The relationship between mindfulness and Stoic attitudes remains stable over time.
Preregistration
This study is not preregistered.
Opmerkingen
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Over the past 50 years, the Eastern concept of mindfulness has attracted significant attention from Western societies (Pickert, 2014). Currently, it is one of the most popular topics in psychological research and mental health practice (Germer et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2021; Shapiro & Carlson, 2009). Mindfulness refers to a receptive state of consciousness achieved by consistently and intentionally directing attention to the present moment in an accepting, non-judgmental, and non-reactive manner (Kabat-Zinn, 1994). By consistently practicing mindfulness, individuals can enhance their overall well-being, improve emotional regulation, manage stress more effectively, and develop stronger interpersonal relationships, ultimately leading to an improved quality of life (Grossman et al., 2004). Moreover, regular cultivation of mindfulness can develop mindfulness traits (Kiken et al., 2015). Mindfulness disposition has been proven to be highly valuable for experiencing and responding to various situations, offering numerous health-promoting benefits (Keng et al., 2011).
The popularity of the concept of mindfulness in the Western world raises an intriguing question that despite its cultural foreignness, the idea of mindfulness has been widely embraced. Originating from Tibetan Buddhism and the Zen tradition, which have been cultivated for over 2500 years (Fennell & Segal, 2013; Furnell et al., 2024; Keng et al., 2011; McMahan, 2024), mindfulness was introduced in the West in the 1970s (Harrington & Dunne, 2015; Wilson, 2014). Since then, it has become the basis for many empirically grounded health-promoting, preventive, therapeutic, and developmental practices (Kabat-Zinn, 2003). Despite its non-Western origin, mindfulness has been effectively integrated into Western approaches to mental health and well-being, demonstrating versatility and adaptability in different contexts (Zhang et al., 2021).
Interestingly, the Western world has a tradition that shares similar characteristics with the tenets of mindfulness and the Zen approach dating back to ancient times (Cavanna et al., 2023; Pigliucci, 2022). These ideas can be traced back to the European Stoic School, which was founded by Zeno of Kition in the third century BC in Athens and thrived until the third century AD (Baltzly, 2010; Sellars, 2003). Although twentieth century Western psychologists first encountered mindfulness in Tibetan Buddhism, historical analyses suggest that Buddhist thinkers were influenced by Stoic ideas (Pathak et al., 2017; Wong, 2006). The philosophical principles of Stoicism involve specific beliefs and behaviors, including mental reactions that overlap with mindfulness (Baltzly, 2019; Pigliucci, 2022). Consequently, mindfulness and Stoic attitudes share convergent goals, assumptions, and implementation methods. However, the existing literature and research on the comparison of these two concepts are scarce (Cavanna et al., 2023; Sellars, 2018).
Drawing on an analysis of the foundational principles of Stoicism, we can identify several aspects that closely resemble the facets of mindfulness. Mindfulness trait represents an individual’s ability or tendency to maintain a mindful mental attitude and behavior in daily life (Baer et al., 2006). Among the core principles of Stoicism is the pursuit of peace of mind and happiness through a specific attitude similar to mindfulness tenets (Sellars, 2018). For instance, both mindfulness and Stoicism emphasize the significance of being present in the moment. Central to mindfulness trait is the capacity to focus attention, enhance awareness, observe, describe experiences, and ultimately, foster a sense of presence in the world (Baer et al., 2006).
Similar to mindfulness, Stoicism seeks to enhance quality of life by focusing on the “here and now,” refraining from dwelling on the past or future (Pathak et al., 2017). “Live the present moment!” wrote Seneca the Younger in his work On the Shortness of Life, IX, p.1.
Stoics used the Greek term prosochē, meaning “attention,” which can be compared to the Pali Buddhist term sati, or “mindfulness,” the inspiration for modern mindfulness-based practices (Pigliucci, 2022). It was a crucial aspect of ancient Stoic school lifestyles. For instance, in a list by Philo of Alexandria that outlined the most important exercises in the late Stoic-Platonic tradition, prosochē (mindfulness) was placed alongside searching (zetesis), inquiry (scepsis), reading (anagnosis), listening (acroasis), self-mastery (enkrateia), and indifference to indifferent things (Hadot, 1995). The prominent philosopher of the Stoic School, Marcus Aurelius, also embraced this idea in his texts. Aurelius’ “Meditations” comprises the emperor’s private notes, including thoughts and observations during philosophical exercises. These notes contain passages related to at least three potential objects of mindfulness: the self, immediate environment, and philosophical doctrine. Thus, Stoic mindfulness largely mirrors the concept of mindfulness—encouraging awareness by concentrating on sensory data, mental reactions, and external events.
Moreover, both mindfulness and Stoicism emphasize the importance of self-reflection and introspection (Cavanna et al., 2023). The Stoic approach involves practicing the ability to observe and understand internal experiences and reactions (Hadot, 1998). This notion is similar to the mindfulness state and trait, which focuses on the ability to observe and describe different elements of reality (Baer et al., 2006). By dedicating time to examine one’s thoughts and actions, individuals can identify areas of growth, improve their self-awareness, and gain a deeper understanding of themselves and their values. Ultimately, this leads to a more meaningful and fulfilling life.
Next, both concepts encourage and promote focusing on one’s thoughts and actions, rather than being overly concerned with external events (Sellars, 2003; Stankiewicz, 2014). Mindfulness involves adopting an attitude at the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral levels that views all internal and external experiences as transient, while observing them in a non-judgmental manner with openness, acceptance, understanding, and compassion (Baer et al., 2006). Similarly, Stoicism teaches the idea of accepting the course of events and laws of nature and adapting to them. This attitude is rooted in the belief that the world is neutral and most events are beyond our control. Therefore, attributing excessive importance to such events can negatively affect mental health. Stoicism refers to the recognition of an individual’s limited influence on the world, and learning to separate one’s well-being from external situations.
The non-judgmental and non-reactive approach of mindfulness, which promotes self-regulation, aligns closely with the Stoic approach, which aims to foster emotional indifference or a lack of strong emotional reactions (even to death) (Baltzly, 2010; Menzies & Whittle, 2021; Radon, 2014). Detaching oneself from external things and concentrating on personal experiences without being overly attached to them are the paths to achieve this state. It is not about suppressing emotions (which is often mistakenly considered the Stoic attitude) but about observing and understanding one’s own experiences and treating them impersonally. This understanding can be used to build a rational and helpful perspective on oneself and the world.
Another similarity between Stoic attitudes and mindfulness trait can be observed in the approach toward others. Through self-mastery, the Stoic sage is expected to develop a deep understanding of others’ shortcomings (Stankiewicz, 2014). Consequently, they should be able to remain unconcerned about others’ opinions of themselves and maintain patience when witnessing unkind actions. Stoic attitudes also have a social aspect, manifesting in patience, kindness toward others, and a desire to positively influence humanity. Embodying forbearance, patience, and kindness, the Stoic approach aligns closely with the attitudes of acceptance, non-judgment, and compassion toward oneself and others that characterize mindfulness (Van den Brink & Koster, 2015; Gilbert, 2013).
Moreover, both mindfulness and Stoicism share a strong affinity for values, with each emphasizing the importance of living a virtuous life and focusing on one’s beliefs and ethical principles. The Stoic school developed a comprehensive ethical system based on virtue ethics, with all Stoic practices ultimately aimed at living in accordance with essential values such as moderation, courage, and wisdom (Stankiewicz, 2014). Consequently, a person with a Stoic attitude believes that life should be guided by these virtues (Sherman, 2005). Pursuing them helps maintain balance, leads to happiness and peace of mind, and enables acting despite difficulties (Fenell, 2014; Stankiewicz, 2014). Similarly, values, such as courage and wisdom, are essential in mindfulness-based approaches of compassion, acceptance, and commitment (Kohlenberg, et al., 2015; Neff, 2015; Furnell et al., 2024). Both Stoic attitudes and mindfulness promote building on these values and actively engaging in life even when faced with challenges.
Finally, there are similarities in cultivating mindfulness traits and Stoic attitudes (Cavanna et al., 2023). While formal meditation practices to develop mindfulness are not the primary method of practicing Stoicism, in recent years, there have been increasing attention to the surprising similarities between various practices used by ancient philosophers in Greece and India, which could be considered mystical. The limited popularity of contemplative methods in modern Stoicism may stem from earlier interpretations that did not focus on its practical aspects. Scholars of ancient European philosophy have only recently begun to seriously compare philosophies of ancient Europe with that of China and India, discovering similar practices. Historians of philosophy in the nineteenth century, influenced by Orientalist beliefs, presented European philosophy as a tradition distinct from Eastern thought (Husserl, 1970). The Greeks were considered inventors of Western rationalism, steering clear of the mysticism typical of Persia and India. However, this understanding is changing.
Many advanced philosophical concepts developed in antiquity by Brahmins and Buddhist monks have been discovered (e.g., Panini’s theory of language and the Buddhist theory of mind) (Kiparsky, 1995; Olendzki, 2003). However, a new perspective on the ancient philosophy of the Greeks and Romans emerged because of the pioneering research of French philosophers and the classicist Pierre Hadot (1995, 2002). He points out that the teaching of Greek and Roman philosophy primarily took place orally within the framework of established philosophical schools, and practices specific to each school were transmitted orally. Written materials were supplementary, resulting in a lack of detailed descriptions of these practices, unlike Buddhism where Suttas provide precise instructions explaining various meditation techniques. Thus, historians of classical philosophy have only fragments of text for analysis to highlight the spiritual exercises practiced by ancient philosophers. A remarkable example is the new interpretation of Socrates, according to which some of his behaviors, described with surprise by Xenophon, closely resemble meditation (Chase, 2022).
Thus, both mindfulness and Stoicism maintain that systematic training is crucial for establishing, reinforcing, and advancing their respective concepts (Cavanna et al., 2023). The Stoic emphasis on self-in-the-world and self-reflection techniques were a response to Socrates’ call to “take care of oneself” (Stankiewicz, 2014). In Marcus Aurelius’ writings, we can identify traces of two types of mindfulness practice: mindfulness as a constant state of awareness of the self and the external world and mindfulness as a deliberate action practiced in a specific context. The “prosochê” described by Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, and Seneca was a way of exercising, but it was not the same as the modern practice of “mindfulness” (Pigliucci, 2022). Nevertheless, mindfulness training is an integral part of Stoic practice (Robertson, 2018).
Furthermore, Stoicism and mindfulness promote systematic informal practices applied in everyday situations, leading to the intensive development of their respective skill sets. As a guide to proper internal and external behavior, Stoicism requires conscious implementation and consistent self-enforcement (Pathak et al., 2017). A Stoic is expected to exhibit constant self-awareness. Similarly, mindfulness emphasizes the importance of systematic and persistent practices in everyday life for personal growth (Kabat-Zinn, 2013). Directing attention to specific content, combined with adopting an appropriate attitude toward it, is central to both approaches. This mental activity can be considered the essence of the method for shaping and training both ideas.
Finally, it has become increasingly clear that both mindfulness and Stoicism hold considerable potential for clinical applications (Cavanna et al., 2023). The practice of mindfulness and the cultivation of a mindful state exert significant impacts on psychological functioning and health, forming the basis for a wide range of training and therapeutic interventions, including Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) (Furnell et al., 2024; Levin, 2023; Oman, 2023; Wunder & Jones, 2023). Concurrently, Stoicism has seen a revival in recent years, evidenced by the publication of new textbooks on the subject and a growing interest in Stoic practices (Dhiman, 2020; Holiday & Hanselman, 2016; Robertson, 2019; Whiting & Konstantakos, 2021).
Stoicism, known for its significant psychological insights, introduced a collection of psychological methods designed to maintain or recover mental well-being and started to be seen as a kind of psychotherapy (Cavanna et al., 2023; Robertson, 2013; Woollen, 2003). Thus, it has influenced contemporary therapy, with several of its techniques being incorporated into modern practices (Robertson, 2016, 2018, 2019; Sorabji, 1997). For instance, Epictetus’ assertion that “people are not disturbed by events, but by their perception of them” has been frequently cited by Dr. Albert Ellis, a pioneering figure in cognitive therapy, to highlight the critical role of cognitive appraisal in emotional responses (Jarrett, 2008). Furthermore, the application of Marcus Aurelius’ technique of negative visualization in cognitive-behavioral therapy underscores the enduring relevance of Stoic principles in this field (Edwards, 2021; Robertson, 2018, 2019). So stoic ideology has been integral to the development of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), forming the cornerstone of most second-generation CBT approaches (Cavanna et al., 2023).
Expanding on Stoicism’s crucial contribution to the development of CBT, it is notable how numerous Stoic methods have been woven into contemporary therapeutic approaches. These techniques are now used to support individuals with various psychiatric conditions, including social anxiety, obsessive–compulsive disorder, major depressive disorder, personality disorders, and the psychological aspects of stuttering (Cavanna et al., 2023; Connery et al., 2023; Robertson & Codd, 2019). Among these, Socratic questioning emerges as a key tool for helping clients uncover and challenge their irrational beliefs. This technique encourages clients to deeply analyze their thoughts and the evidence behind them, fostering a rational and less distressing viewpoint on their life circumstances. Another core Stoic strategy, the dichotomy of control, imparts the valuable lesson of concentrating efforts on what is within our grasp while accepting what lies beyond our control. In therapeutic settings, this practice aids clients in shifting their focus towards achievable internal objectives rather than external outcomes that are out of their hands, thus alleviating feelings of anxiety and frustration. The practice of separating judgments from events, or cognitive distancing, further exemplifies Stoicism’s enduring relevance in contemporary therapy. By assisting clients in recognizing their thoughts as mere interpretations rather than unequivocal facts, therapists facilitate a reduction in emotional distress and promote a more balanced outlook on life’s challenges. The adoption of these Stoic practices in therapy not only reaffirms the enduring wisdom of Stoic philosophy but also diversifies the therapeutic toolkit, providing various methods to cultivate mental health and well-being.
Significantly, both Western mindfulness and Stoic philosophies underpin many third-wave cognitive-behavioral therapy approaches, such as Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), and Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) (Cavanna et al., 2023). These modalities incorporate mindfulness and Stoic principles as fundamental elements of their methodologies, demonstrating the synergistic bond between these age-old philosophies and current therapeutic approaches. This fusion not only emphasizes the lasting impact of these traditions on mental health and well-being but also affirms the seamless blend of Buddhist and Stoic teachings within the scope of contemporary therapy (Diaz et al., 2015; Murguia & Díaz, 2015; Robertson, 2018, 2019).
The integration of Stoic with Buddhist philosophies and mindfulness practices includes also the therapeutic benefits of nature immersion for mental health (Fabjanski & Brymer, 2017). Both traditions advocate for a deep, mindful connection with nature, suggesting that such engagement can significantly improve well-being and reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety. This approach proposes a harmonious integration with the natural world, fostering a sense of peace and contentment. Through mindful presence within natural settings, individuals can gain a deeper understanding of their interconnectedness with life, offering a promising pathway for interventions and enhancing overall mental health.
Based on these considerations, the concepts of mindfulness and Stoic philosophy share several fundamental elements. Unfortunately, to date, no empirical studies have been conducted to emphasize these similarities and analyze the relationship between these phenomena. Thus far, research on Stoicism has primarily focused on Stoic beliefs in the context of behavior (e.g., not showing emotions) and coping strategies when dealing with health problems, such as severe stress, illness, and pain (Becker, 2003; Stempsey, 2004). We aimed to investigate the relationship between the broadly defined Stoic attitude and the mindfulness trait in the general population.
To measure Stoic attitudes, it was necessary to develop a reliable and valid tool. Two previous measurements of Stoicism defined it as a behavioral pattern and referred to its selected aspects (Calderón et al., 2017; Pathak et al., 2017). First, The Liverpool Stoicism Scale (LSS) focuses on measuring stoic taciturnity exclusively (Gaitniece-Putāne & Raščevska, 2006; Wagstaff & Rowledge, 1995). It contains 20 items, most of which describe the behavior (e.g. “I tend not to express my emotions.”) as well as other aphorisms.
The second tool, The Pathak-Wieten Stoicism Ideology Scale (PW-SIS), measures Stoic beliefs and sense of self in four aspects: stoic taciturnity, stoic endurance, stoic serenity, and stoic death indifference (Pathak et al., 2017). Stoic taciturnity refers to the belief that one should not share one’s problems and emotions with others; stoic endurance, that one should not complain of physical suffering; stoic serenity, the need to avoid experiencing strong emotions; and stoic death indifference, that one should not fear or avoid death. The dimensions of the PW-SIS were selected under the assumption that they could play important roles in analyzing health behaviors of people (e.g., help-seeking) and coping with chronic and terminal illnesses. The final version of the scale has 12 items; a sample item is “I believe I should experience strong emotions.” The authors assumed that Stoicism is a system of self-regulation rather than a behavior or personality trait; thus, the items relate to the ideology (a guide on who you are and how you should or should not act).
Although existing scales assess many aspects of Stoicism, they do not encompass several Stoic principles highlighted in scholarly literature. Consequently, this study aimed to develop an instrument capable of precisely evaluating Stoic attitudes, while also ensuring its reliability and validity. The genesis of our research involved the construction of a novel tool designed to measure additional Stoic principles. We incorporated statements addressing extra dimensions identified through an extensive review of Stoic texts, emphasizing mindfulness of the present moment and specific responses to personal experiences, external events, and interactions with individuals and values. These facets are deemed pertinent not only in health-related scenarios but also in understanding overall human behavior and well-being.
Developing the new scale enabled us to examine the relationship between the mindfulness trait and Stoic attitudes more thoroughly. Based on theoretical analysis, we aimed to empirically explore this relationship, hypothesizing that higher levels of mindfulness would be positively correlated with stronger Stoic attitudes, reflecting shared elements such as present-moment awareness. The proposed dual research design, which included the development and validation of the 100-I-K questionnaire, represented the first empirical attempt to investigate this relationship comprehensively. The study aimed to contribute to the advancement of existing research tools, theoretical understanding, and practical applications in the fields of mindfulness and Stoicism.
Method
Participants
A total of 437 individuals (the average age of participants was 36.5 years, with a standard deviation of 12.3 years, and the age range of participants was from 18 to 65 years; n = 202 males, 46.2%) participated in the study, and 347 were re-surveyed two weeks later (the average age of participants was 37.7 years, with a standard deviation of 12.4 years, and the age range of participants was from 18 to 65 years, n = 155 males (44.7%). The sample was examined by age, gender and place of residence, and no significant discrepancies in the distributions of these variables were found. The demographic characteristics of the samples are shown in Table 1. Each participant received detailed information about the study and an option to withdraw. All participants provided informed consent.
Table 1
Descriptive statistics on gender, age and place of residence of respondents sample
Full sample
Re-sample
Female
Male
Female
Male
n
235
202
192
155
Age (mean (SD))
35.64 (12.40)
37.45 (12.17)
37.07 (12.76)
38.54 (11.97)
Age (median, skew, kurt.)
34; 0.58; − 0.60
38; 0.17; − 0.98
35; 0.45; − 0.84
39; 0.09; − 0.90
Age (min–max)
18–65
Place of residence
(n (%))
Village
56 (23.8)
40 (19.8)
48 (25.0)
34 (21.9)
< 20 k
29 (12.3)
26 (12.9)
22 (11.5)
13 ( 8.4)
20–50 k
29 (12.3)
26 (12.9)
24 (12.5)
20 (12.9)
50–100 k
25 (10.6)
18 ( 8.9)
20 (10.4)
14 ( 9.0)
100–200 k
21 ( 8.9)
17 ( 8.4)
17 ( 8.9)
13 ( 8.4)
200–500 k
23 ( 9.8)
25 (12.4)
16 ( 8.3)
19 (12.3)
> 500 k
52 (22.1)
50 (24.8)
45 (23.4)
42 (27.1)
Procedure
The participants were recruited through an online Computer Assisted Web Interviewing (CAWI) survey panel as a representative sample. The participants completed the questionnaire and a demographic survey. The study procedure involved testing the prototype version of the 100-I-K questionnaire for measuring Stoic attitude twice, with a 2-week interval, to assess the stability of the results and the relationship between scores, mindfulness level, and Stoic attitude. Each measurement took approximately 15–20 min to complete. Participants were provided with detailed information about the study’s purpose, participation conditions, and procedures before beginning the questionnaires. They were instructed to complete the questionnaires in a calm environment, ensuring their responses accurately reflected their experiences and feelings. Additionally, each questionnaire included specific instructions to guide participants through the process.
Measures
The 100-I-K Scale was designed to measure the Stoic attitude, considering the four aspects of this phenomenon identified through previous theoretical literature: attitudes toward internal experiences, external things, other people, and professed values. This division was based on Robertson (2019). He observed that the three main parts of Stoicism (physics, ethics, and logic) correspond to the model adopted in CBT and Aaron Beck’s primary cognitive triad. Physics corresponds to feelings and thoughts about the world and the future, ethics to behaviors and thoughts about others, and logic to cognition and thoughts about oneself. We have added a separate factor describing the adopted values, i.e. virtues, as we believed it is important for possible distinction between a committed Stoic and someone who happens to exhibit a Stoic attitude. We included two items connected to Stoic mindfulness as well, as it was a part of our study.
Stoic attitude toward internal experiences is characterized by apatheia, a state of being devoid of violent negative emotions or passions (Irvine, 2008). This state can be achieved by focusing on one’s experiences and impressions, while separating oneself from external things. This does not mean suppressing emotions, but rather to observe and understand them in an impersonal manner, allowing for the construction of a rational vision of the world and oneself. Stoic attitudes are characterized by the ability to understand and regulate internal experiences in a detached manner. An example item is “When someone upsets me, I wait for the anger to pass on its own.”
The attitude toward external things is based on a belief in the neutrality of the world, where most events are beyond our control. Stoics acknowledge that some things are more desirable than others, but ultimately, personal well-being depends mainly on one’s attitude. Therefore, Stoic attitude involves understanding one’s limited influence on the world, acceptance, and ability to separate one's well-being from external situations. An example item is “Not all things are under my influence.”
The attitude toward other people is consistent with Stoics’ belief that people are fundamentally social beings. Thus, their practices have a dual purpose: to improve personal well-being and exert a positive influence on society. The Stoic sage understands the shortcomings of other people, which enables them not to be concerned with others’ opinions, and to be patient in the face of wrongdoing. Instead, they act boldly in a way that benefits as many people as possible. A Stoic attitude has a social element manifested in patience and kindness toward others. An example item is “I am kind toward others.”
Attitude toward professed values comes from the elaborate ethical system of the Stoic school based on the ethics of virtue. All Stoic practices ultimately aim to live in accordance with the fundamental virtues of justice, temperance, courage, and wisdom. Therefore, a person with a Stoic attitude should share the belief that one should be guided by these values in life. An example item is “People value my sense of justice.”
Similar to the PW-SIS scale, the 100-I-K questionnaire assumes that Stoicism is an attitude or set of beliefs that regulate behavior. However, it is important to understand how these beliefs translate into everyday actions. Therefore, the questionnaire includes both belief statements and behavioral descriptions. It has 22 statements (in Online Resource 1) and the participants needed to rate them on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = I strongly disagree; 5 = I strongly agree) in relation to themselves.
Freiburg Mindfulness Inventory (FMI-14) (Wallach et al., 2006) in Polish, adapted from Radon (2017), was used to measure mindfulness as a trait. Participants were asked to respond on a 4-point Likert scale (rarely, occasionally, fairly often, and almost always). An example item is “I am open to the experience of the present moment.” Owing to the discretion allowed by the authors to determine the timeframe to which the statements referred, two time variants were used in the study. In the first measure, the reference was the last 2 weeks, and in the second measure, participants stated how it usually is for them. The timeframes allowed us to examine the relationships in different contexts and their stability over time.
Pathak-Wieten Stoicism Ideology Scale (PW-SIS) (Pathak et al., 2017) measured Stoicism as an ideology (belief system). It focuses exclusively on attitudes toward inner experiences and the so-called emotional coolness and consists of 12 items, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.74 (Pathak et al., 2017). Participants were asked to respond on a 5-point scale: disagree, partially disagree, do not know, partially agree, and agree. An example item is, “I think I should/should not experience strong emotions” (reverse-coded).
The 100-I-K instrument was assessed using an additional control scale containing one item, “I try to be stoic” to measure subjective sense of adopting a stoic attitude. Participants responded on a 5-point scale (1 = all the time, 5 = never) (Pathak et al., 2017).
Data Analyses
We conducted the statistical analysis using R version 4.2.1, utilizing two essential packages: lavaan (version 0.6–15) and psychonetrics (version 0.10). The lavaan package (Rosseel, 2012) provides robust functionalities for structural equation modeling (SEM) and allows us to examine complex relationships between variables. On the other hand, the psychonetrics package (Epskamp, 2021) offers comprehensive tools for psychometric analyses, enabling us to assess various psychological constructs with precision and reliability.
We tested the prototype version of 100-I-K for measuring Stoic attitude twice (2 weeks apart) and assessed the relationship between scores, mindfulness level, and Stoic attitude. The validity of the 100-I-K instrument was examined using an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to confirm the consistency between its structure and the theoretical assumptions, providing evidence of its theoretical validity. The EFA employed in this study utilized the function from the psych package in R (Revelle, 2023). It aimed to identify underlying latent constructs by rotating the factors using the oblimin method and estimating the factor correlation matrix using the minimum residual (minres) method. The VSS (Velicer’s Minimum Average Partial) mean was calculated as part of the EFA process. This measure assesses the average of the squared correlations between items and all other items in the dataset. It aids in determining the optimal number of factors to extract from the data by evaluating how well the extracted factors account for the variance in the dataset, and achieves a maximum of 0.68 with 2 factors.
The validity was also confirmed using longitudinal CFA analysis with lavaan package in R (Rosseel, 2012) by examining the invariance between the first and second measurements. This analysis examined differences in fit indices between models with fixed loadings (week invariance), and intercepts (strong invariance), and residuals (strict invariance). In our analysis, we utilized the following fit indices: comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). These fit indices are commonly used to assess the goodness of fit of structural equation models.
We employed the Satorra-Bentler correction method to estimate the parameters of the analyzed models. This correction is particularly useful when the assumptions of normality are violated, as it provides more accurate parameter estimates and standard errors in such cases.
By incorporating the Satorra-Bentler correction, we aimed to ensure the robustness and reliability of our CFA results, thereby enhancing the validity of our model evaluation process.
The reliability of the tool was evaluated in two ways: (1) through consistency analysis using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, and (2) based on the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for test–retest results.
Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used for the 100-I-K, FMI-14, and PW-SIS summary scores to test divergent and convergent validity. Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to examine the associations between the scores of 100-I-K and the scale of adopting a Stoic attitude.
Results
Construct Validity: Confirmatory Factor Analysis
The existence of the assumed four factors was not confirmed by empirical data. The fit of the theoretical model and several competing models were examined (Table 2). None of the following had a good fit to the data: (1) the model assuming a single factor present in all items (baseline), (2) the one considering correlations between errors of items (baseline + covariance(s)), (3) the four-factor theoretical model, and (4) the four-factor model based on exploratory analysis.
Table 2
The CFA indices for models for 100-I-K scale
Models
χ2 (df)
p-value
CFI
TLI
RMSEA [90% CI]
SRMR
Range of standardized loadings
First sample, n = 437
Baseline
593.1 (209)
< 0.01
0.74
0.72
0.07 [0.07, 0.08]
0.07
0.14–0.64
Baseline + cov
505.1 (206)
< 0.01
0.80
0.78
0.07 [0.06, 0.07]
0.07
0.04–0.62
Theoretical
271.8 (98)
< 0.01
0.84
0.80
0.07 [0.06, 0.08]
0.06
0.32–0.84
efa_4
335.2 (149)
< 0.01
0.86
0.83
0.06 [0.05, 0.07]
0.06
0.28–0.89
efa_2
237.0 (89)
< 0.01
0.85
0.85
0.07 [0.06, 0.08]
0.06
0.28–0.70
efa_2 + cov
189.6 (86)
< 0.01
0.90
0.88
0.06 [0.05, 0.07]
0.07
0.27–0.62
Second sample, n = 347
efa_2 + cov
199.3 (86)
< 0.01
0.88
0.86
0.07 [0.06, 0.08]
0.07
0.39–0.67
The variances of the latent variables were constrained to 1 in the analysis. Baseline—one factor for all items; baseline + cov—baseline model with correlated errors for items 6 ~ 8, 5 ~ 18, and 5 ~ 6; theoretical—model based on theory with four factors with four items on each; efa_4—model based on exploratory analysis with four factors; efa_2—model based on exploratory analysis with two factors, without crossvariance, and items with low uniqueness value; efa_2 + cov—model like efa_2 with correlated errors for items 6 ~ 8, 4 ~ 15, and 7 ~ 15. CFI comparative fit index, TLI Tucker–Lewis fit index, RMSEA root mean square error of approximation, SRMR standardized root mean square residual—robust values based on Satorra-Bentler correction.
The best fit was for a two-factor model based on exploratory analysis (Table 3), which only considered items with high factor loadings and a large difference in factor loadings in favor of one of the factors.
Table 3
Component loadings based on exploratory factor analysis with OLS algorithm with oblimin rotation. Number of factors chosen on parallel analysis
Train sample (n = 437)
KMO = 0.85
Validation sample (n = 347)
KMO = 0.87
Items
Factor 1
Factor 2
Uniquness
Factor 1
Factor 2
Uniquness
I 2
0.39
0.86
0.40
0.83
I 4
0.48
0.74
0.59
0.64
I 7
0.34
0.83
0.35
0.82
I 12
0.52
0.72
0.46
0.71
I 13
0.68
0.59
0.77
0.47
I 14
0.51
0.61
0.54
0.64
I 15
0.42
0.68
0.53
0.64
I 18
0.71
0.53
0.59
0.58
I 1
0.35
0.85
0.35
0.84
I 6
0.61
0.56
0.69
0.49
I 8
0.73
0.49
0.61
0.62
I 9
0.43
0.67
0.50
0.64
I 11
0.44
0.85
0.70
0.55
I 17
0.46
0.75
0.53
0.68
I 19
0.39
0.79
0.43
0.79
Items with loadings inconsistency in both sample, cross variance or with loading less than 0.3:
I 3
0.43
0.65
0.37
0.37
0.65
I 5
0.48
0.73
0.38
0.34
0.66
I 10
0.88
0.89
I 16
0.91
0.92
I 20
0.85
0.36
0.78
I 21
-0.32
0.92
0.32
0.90
I 22
0.31
0.86
0.79
The adopted model was a comparatively good fit to the data collected in the second sample (Table 2). In order to verify the degree of similarity and detect possible differences in the performance of items between the samples that could be due to flaws in the items, we performed an invariance analysis between measurements. Its results allow us to conclude that the scale is reliable and allows us to assess the proposed dimensions in a stable manner, as we found invariance at all three levels: loadings (ΔRMSEA < 0.01, χ2(15) = 14.6, p = 0.48), intercepts (ΔRMSEA < 0.01, χ2(13) = 7.61, p = 0.87), and residuals (ΔRMSEA = 0.03, χ2(15) = 18.3, p = 0.25).
The best-fitting model with standardized factor loadings and correlations between the residuals of items 6 with 8 (r = 0.31), 12 with 18 (r = 0.21), and 7 with 15 (r = − 0.27) is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1
The best CFA model for the 100-I-K scale
×
The efa_2 model showed an acceptable fit and did not fully confirm the theoretical structure to the observed data (χ2(89) = 237.8, p < 0.01, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.85, Tucker-Lewis index [TLI] = 0.83, standardized root mean square residual [SRMR] = 0.06, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.07, 90% CI = [0.06, 0.08], average variance extracted [AVE] = 27.3%). To enhance model fit, the efa2_cov model, consisting of 15 items, was modified to allow for correlations among the error terms of three pairs of items. The resulting model demonstrated adequate fit (χ2(86) = 189.6, p < 0.01, CFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.88, RMSEA = 0.06, 90% CI = [0.05, 0.07], SRMR = 0.07), suggesting that the revised model provides a more accurate representation of the underlying construct. Nevertheless, the presence of correlations between residuals indicates some specific correlations between pairs of items that go beyond the main factor structure. These correlations may be due to content or stylistic similarity between the items, which is not directly related to the main dimensions of the psychological construct measured by the scale. In conclusion, although the efa2_cov model shows almost satisfactory fit, the structure of the 100-I-K scale is complex and requires further research. Future analyses should focus on better understanding the nature of these specific correlations between items and their impact on the measurement of stoic attitude.
Analysis of the results indicates the difficulty in confirming the theoretical validity of the scale. Analysis of the partial correlations between items in both samples revealed that the correlation structure was not replicable. Statistically significant differences were observed between repeated measurements on the same sample (n = 347; Δχ2(6) = 96.89, p < 0.01). Weaker relationships from the first study were strengthened in the second study, which may be interpreted as a memory effect or increased interest in the research topic by participants. This suggests that participants may have “learned” the construct under study, rather than having a stable nomological network of the concepts constituting that construct (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955). Only the relationships between Items 4 and 15, 5 and 18, 6 and 8, and 12 and 18 showed stability over time (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2
Partial correlations in both samples from Study 1
×
Based on the widely accepted unitary definition of validity (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014), the 100-I-K tool cannot be considered valid. However, this approach to validity has been criticized, and a return to the original concept of validity has been advocated (see Borsboom et al., 2009). The primary evidence for the validity of a tool is not its ability to establish relationships within the conceptual network but rather its ability to reproduce different outcomes due to differences in the level of the measured construct (attribute). As it was not possible to manipulate the level of Stoicism, we conducted a study focusing on the criterion aspect of the 100-I-K scale validity. We assumed that if the 100-I-K were a good instrument, we would find strong relationships between the results obtained in the tools measuring mindfulness, and weaker relationships with the ideology of Stoicism and with the engagement in adopting a Stoic attitude in one’s own life.
Reliability of the 100-I-K Scale
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for Factor 1 in sample 1 was 0.75, and for Factor 2 it was 0.71, and in Sample 2, it was 0.78 and 0.75, respectively. The reliability measured by the ICC (3k) coefficient was 0.82, 95% CI [0.77,0.85] indicating high stability of the results.
Mindfulness and Stoic Attitude
The findings revealed a strong positive correlation between mindfulness as a trait and Stoic attitude in both initial (r = 0.65) and follow-up measurements (r = 0.63). This co-occurrence was observed in the analysis of the current state (last 2 weeks) and long-term effects (r = 0.53). Moreover, mindfulness showed a significant correlation with Stoic ideology in the first (r = 0.20) and second measurements (r = 0.23). Therefore, the outcomes of the two assessments were consistent, confirming the stability of the observed relationships over time. Additionally, there was a statistically significant but weak relationship between the 100-I-K scores and the understanding of Stoicism as an ideology for the initial (r = 0.19) and follow-up samples (r = 0.21). Furthermore, Stoic attitudes were related to the subjective declaration of adopting Stoic attitudes (ρ = − 0.19 and − 0.18 for both samples, respectively). Thus, the results support the hypothesis regarding the relationship between Stoic attitude and mindfulness.
Discussion
This study aimed to analyze the relationship between mindfulness and Stoic attitude, which, according to prior theoretical analyses, share common elements. This was the first empirical comparison of these two constructs. Additionally, a tool was developed to measure Stoic attitudes more comprehensively than before, and a survey was conducted on a representative sample with two separate measurements. Furthermore, the tool was compared with a currently available questionnaire that examines a single aspect of Stoic attitude. However, it was found that the developed questionnaire requires further psychometric refinement, and currently, only the total score that captures overall attitudes toward Stoicism can be used. This score was partially related to an earlier tool measuring Stoicism and the deliberate tendency to adopt a Stoic attitude. Thus, our hypothesis regarding the connection between mindfulness traits and Stoic attitudes was confirmed. This suggests that these two conceptual frameworks share previously unexplored similarities. Mindfulness, with its roots in the Eastern world, can also be partially characterized as a Stoic attitude that has been present for centuries in Western civilization, albeit with much less recognition (Cavanna et al., 2023).
The results revealed that the constructed questionnaire broadly measures Stoic attitudes. However, instead of the four expected components (attitudes toward internal and external things, toward other people, and Stoic values), it contains two main factors. Analysis of the items of the two components suggests that they encompass broader areas of Stoic functioning: emotional attitude and engagement in the world. The two-factor model is intriguing from a philosophical standpoint because the first factor applies not only to Stoicism but also to other great schools of thought. However, the second factor is unique to Stoicism, which explicitly calls for active involvement in social life.
This distinction is clear in thorough analysis of the Stoic doctrine, as its system appears to be inconsistent. Ancient Stoics claimed that their ethics were based on logic and metaphysics. However, it is difficult to explain why the Stoic notion of nature should be considered descriptive rather than normative. It seems that Stoic philosophers tried to justify their ethics using post hoc metaphysics. Without this abstract source, the two halves of Stoic ethics (emotional control and social engagement) lack a common philosophical base. Moreover, taking metaphysics into consideration, it is social engagement that distinguishes Stoicism from other Hellenic schools. It can be argued that this can be seen as a natural consequence of Stoicism’s history. Its origins are tied to the school of Cynicism, which was predominantly preoccupied with the conception of ethical virtue. Its harsh assessments about the role of society did not leave any place for political engagement. Even the opposite, the Cynics advocated for the subversion of societal norms and eventually discarded. Zeno of Citium was initially a Cynic, who eventually developed his own system, but his Cynical roots remained an important influence on Early Stoicism. Only during the later development of the Stoic thought a call to engage in the world appears. It was a necessity, since the Greeks had to respond to a rising threat of Rome. Thus, the Middle Stoa became more practical. This shift was cemented during the Roman period of Stoicism, as Romans flavored the Stoic doctrine with their civic virtues (Cavanna et al., 2023).
Control of emotions exists not only in the philosophy of this period, as Hadot (1995) points out, but also in Buddhism, Taoism, and early Christian practices. It is possible that a factor common to various philosophical traditions was identified that was common among different ancient schools of philosophy. However, this claim requires further supporting theoretical and empirical research. In summary, one primary factor was identified that was significantly related to the previous PW-SIS scale and subjective claims of adopting a Stoic attitude. This means that the phenomena covered in this factor are partly covered by other measures while also capturing more aspects of Stoicism beyond them.
In the context of our findings, it is crucial to further investigate the relationship between the identified factors of the constructed questionnaire and how they relate to Stoic philosophy. The correlations between certain item pairs unearthed in our model not only affirm the multifaceted nature of Stoic attitudes but also reveal intriguing thematic bridges that extend the understanding of Stoicism beyond conventional interpretations. Adding to our analysis, the correlations between the residuals of Items 6 with 8, 12 with 18, and 7 with 15 in the best-fitting model suggest relationships that go beyond the common factor content, indicating additional or distinct thematic connections between these item pairs.
The correlation between Items 6 (“I am kind toward others.”) and 8 (“When someone asks me for help, I always try to give it”) might reflect a shared theme of altruism and pro-social behavior, beyond the general attitude towards others. This correlation suggests that kindness and a willingness to help others are not only manifestations of general social attitudes but also relate to a more specific disposition towards active support and assistance to others. This attitude resonates with Stoic cosmopolitanism, highlighting a global sense of brotherhood and ethical responsibility. This idea emphasizes that all human beings belong to a single, global community, advocating for equality, dignity, and fair treatment of all individuals irrespective of their backgrounds.
Similarly, the correlation between Items 12 (“I don’t make decisions on impulse”) and 18 (“I can control my emotions”) underscores the Stoic emphasis on self-regulation, reinforcing the view that Stoicism advocates for a balanced, rational approach to life’s challenges. Beyond their individual factor contributions, this correlation may point to a deeper relationship between the ability to refrain from impulsive decisions and emotional control, suggesting an additional dimension of stoic self-discipline that encompasses both cognitive and emotional aspects.
The negative correlation between Items 7 (“When someone upsets me, I wait for the anger to pass on its own”) and 15 (“I face life’s adversities with courage”) presents an intriguing insight into the Stoic understanding of coping strategies and courage. Unlike contemporary interpretations that often equate courage with quick decision-making and action, Stoicism views courage as a rational act that requires deliberation. This distinction highlights how Stoicism values thoughtful consideration and the mastery of one’s emotions as integral to demonstrating true courage, marking a philosophical departure from more instinctive or immediate notions of bravery.
These correlations offer insights into the intricate ways in which specific stoic attitudes and behaviors are interrelated, suggesting additional layers of complexity within the stoic mindset that extend beyond the primary factor structures. Understanding these additional thematic connections enriches the interpretation of the scale and contributes to a more nuanced view of Stoic attitudes in individuals.
Building on the intricate interrelations between Stoic attitudes as previously discussed, our findings further elucidate how these philosophical principles align closely with contemporary psychological constructs. In line with our expectations, the study showed that Stoic attitudes are strongly related to mindfulness. This effect was confirmed by the fact that Stoic beliefs and subjective self-perception were partially correlated with mindfulness. This result supports earlier theoretical observations, indicating the similarities between the two concepts. The similarities observed in the study are consistent with the developmental paths of both ideas. Nowadays, Stoicism, similar to mindfulness, is no longer just a philosophical school but an attempt to revive this tradition for optimal ways of living and shaping oneself in the modern world (Montgomery, 1993; Pigliucci, 2017).
However, it is noteworthy that the results of the study confirm earlier assumptions that the mindfulness phenomenon does not completely overlap with the mindfulness characteristic of the Stoic attitude (Pigliucci, 2022). John Sellars (2018) highlighted that the main difference between Stoic and modern mindfulness lies in the third object of directing attention mentioned in Stoic sources: stoic doctrine. Modern promoters of mindfulness trait cultivation have focused only on the secular aspects. They agreed that the key to being mindful is being aware of one’s own experiences and environmental objects while refraining from judgment, which has a positive impact on one’s functioning. For Stoics, this goal was insufficient. Although they valued the mindfulness and tranquility associated with it, they also aimed to unite with the Logos, the all-encompassing and universal principle of the Universe, by cultivating a Stoic doctrine. The findings of the present study confirmed this difference. Consequently, despite their significant similarities, mindfulness and prosochē cannot be considered identical concepts. Thus, mindfulness is not entirely synonymous with a Stoic attitude. Nevertheless, the similarities and differences offer the potential to expand our knowledge of these phenomena and may have practical implications.
The results confirm the beneficial effects of therapeutic interventions based on Stoic philosophy. However, they contradict previous studies that suggested the potential negative impact of Stoicism on various aspects related to health behaviors and mental functioning (Moore et al., 2013; Murray et al., 2008). An earlier approach to Stoic attitude, mainly viewed as emotional coolness, was found to be negatively correlated with seeking help and support (Pathak et al., 2017). Another study on patients with cancer found that Stoicism was negatively correlated with perceived social support, optimism, and positive attitude, and positively correlated with helplessness, anxious preoccupation, and depression (Gomez et al., 2022).
This study provides new insights on previous research on the relationship between Stoic ideology and health behaviors. The results suggest that a broader understanding of Stoic attitudes, incorporating elements such as mindfulness, may have a more beneficial relationship with well-being and functioning during illness, similar to mindfulness which is positively linked to health behaviors and functioning during illness (Mehta et al., 2019). Practical interventions based on Stoic attitudes may have different effects on patients with health problems.
Furthermore, the research findings may contribute to the development of practical mindfulness-based interventions aimed at achieving positive outcomes. The results of our study empirically justify the fruitful coexistence of Buddhist and Stoic ideas in modern therapy (Diaz et al., 2015; Robertson, 2018, 2019). Currently, various mindfulness techniques are derived from Tibetan Buddhism and the Zen culture (Furnell et al., 2024). Mindfulness was recognized by Western scholars and practitioners in Tibetan Buddhism, while Stoic ideas were parts of the Western philosophical tradition from the beginning. Consequently, it is expected that the adaptation and usefulness of these ideas in Western cultural settings will be equally valuable. Convergence of Stoic assumptions and methods with these practices opens the prospect of drawing inspiration for further development of this approach (Connery et al., 2023). This would contribute to the continued growth of mindfulness-based practices, considering the cultural factors according to which mindfulness in Stoic terms with European origins is closer to Western culture, while the Buddhist variety is more aligned with Eastern culture.
The research outcomes may support methods of shaping various aspects of mindfulness in the Western world by addressing the challenges of adapting culturally foreign concepts and practices. Optimizing the application of evidence-based practices would be greatly facilitated by a deeper understanding of the Stoic philosophical therapy tradition’s impact on contemporary treatment strategies (Cavanna et al., 2023). Mindfulness in the context of the Stoic tradition may lead to the modification, development, and expansion of existing methods of mindfulness practice. This may be a more accessible method for some individuals. However, advancing this practice into evidence-based clinical interventions and thoroughly evaluating its effectiveness for specific individuals demands further research.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
This study has some limitations that should be considered in future research. First, the questionnaire did not clearly demonstrate the existence of Stoic attitudes as psychological constructs. Instead, the results suggest that attitudes consist of a set of heterogeneous items that are subject to change. This issue calls for an experimental study to determine whether we can refer to it as an attitude or it is more accurately described as a collection of opinions about Stoic attitudes.
Another limitation of the current study relates to the presence of covariances between some of the residuals in our scale. While we have provided explanations for these overlaps, we acknowledge that future research should aim for a scale solution that does not require residual covariances. This could be achieved through further refinement of the items or by considering alternative factor structures. Future studies might explore the possibility of developing more distinct subscales or reassessing the theoretical framework underlying the Stoic attitude construct. This approach could potentially lead to a cleaner factor structure and improve the overall psychometric properties of the scale.
Additionally, researchers could consider using more advanced statistical techniques, such as exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) or bifactor models, to better account for the complexity of the Stoic attitude construct while minimizing the need for residual covariances. By addressing this limitation, future research can contribute to the development of a more robust and theoretically sound measure of Stoic attitudes.
Despite this limitation, this project was complex and consisted of a two-stage survey (tool construction and a correlation study), with each stage having two measurements. Thus, data collected from a large representative sample can be considered a solid source of reliable results.
However, the exclusion of comprehensive demographic variables such as income level, education level, and the cultural context’s potential influence on the participants’ familiarity or sympathy towards Mindfulness or Buddhism. By focusing primarily on age and gender and considering the participants’ likely residence in Poland, we recognize that our study may not fully capture the nuanced ways in which different populations engage with these practices. So there is the need to incorporate a broader demographic approach. Doing so would deepen our understanding of how various groups might benefit from mindfulness and Stoic practices, thereby addressing a crucial gap in our current methodology. Continuing similar research may result also in significant theoretical advances in mindfulness and the psychological and philosophical aspects of Stoicism. One consequence of juxtaposing eastern and western Stoic mindfulness is that the Stoic tradition can be incorporated into further mindfulness research to better understand its nature and potential consequences.
Finally, the study responds to the appeal of the authors of a recent meta-analysis of research trends in mindfulness, which highlights the need for collaboration among representatives of different disciplines to integrate different perspectives on mindfulness to deepen knowledge of its fundamental nature, properties, and possibilities (Lee et al., 2021). This study integrated knowledge of psychological functioning related to mindfulness and philosophical thought, combined with the use of a methodology that can test the novel theoretical considerations about the nature, properties, and consequences of mindfulness through empirical research. Consequently, it can make an original contribution to expand the knowledge of mindfulness and Stoic thought and inspire further scientific and practical progress in the area under study.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing.
Declarations
Ethics Statement
This study was approved by the Adam Mickiewicz University’s Ethics Committee for Research Projects of the Faculty of Psychology and Cognitive Science.
Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Use of Artificial Intelligence Statement
AI was used for editing the manuscript to improve English language.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Met BSL Psychologie Totaal blijf je als professional steeds op de hoogte van de nieuwste ontwikkelingen binnen jouw vak. Met het online abonnement heb je toegang tot een groot aantal boeken, protocollen, vaktijdschriften en e-learnings op het gebied van psychologie en psychiatrie. Zo kun je op je gemak en wanneer het jou het beste uitkomt verdiepen in jouw vakgebied.
