Home   About the Book   Contributors   Table of Contents   The Research   Reviews  

The Neuroscience of Learning and Development

Research

-Order Now  

-Research

-References

Research: Brief Summary of Key Neuroscience Findings Drawn From Chapters in This Book

As was discussed in the introduction, it is now an accepted fact that our brain is designed for boundary spanning, and is highly interconnective (Kaku, 2014). Our brain—which extends beyond the neural networks housed in our cranium to include all of our senses (explained in greater detail in Chapters 2 and 3)—is a dynamic learning machine (Alvarez & Emory, 2006; Chan, Shum, Toulopoulou, & Chen, 2008; Chiesa, Calati & Serretti, 2011; Goldin, & Gross, 2010; Hölzel et al., 2011a; Kozasa et al., 2011; Lutz, Slagter, Dunne, & Davidson, 2008; Todd, Cunningham, Anderson, & Thompson, 2012). However, if we don’t use our brain in ways that align with its dynamic structure and functions, it is unlikely we will see evidence of that use in any decision we make and thus in any learning and development data we collect.

We understand that what we pay attention to literally changes the structure and function of our brain (Alvarez & Emory, 2006; Chan et al., 2008; Chiesa et al., 2011; Goldin & Gross, 2010; Hölzel et al., 2011a; Kozasa et al., 2012; Lutz et al., 2008; Todd et al., 2012). For example, if I stay focused on only the problems, I will see only the problems and not be able to see the possibility of solutions a student may be positing. If I stay focused on the possibilities, I will only see the possibilities and may not address the very real challenges being experienced by my students or colleagues.

Another way to illustrate this is with an example that may be familiar to all of us. If our colleagues or supervisors are only focused on one aspect of the problem solving (e.g., getting what they need or think they need for their functional unit or department, then their ability to see or think beyond their unit or department will not be evident. Such problem-solving practices foster conversations around “haves” and “have-nots,” or “winners” and “losers” and promotes competition for “declining resources,” as opposed to creatively and compassionately dialoging solutions that are lasting and positively impactful for many. If we are clear and intentional about what we are creating within our organization, our decision-making will follow in alignment with that clarity (Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, & Dutton, 2012). We won’t be focusing on fighting for scarce resources, because we will be clear on what we are intending to create and realize that the process of its creation and the accompanying resources to support the creation will be ever changing. This realization is not new, yet many of us don’t consistently practice this; perhaps because we were unaware of how to practice it or perhaps because we underestimated the neurology involved in intentionally changing our behavior.

And what about our students? If we ask them to focus on their learning and development (assuming they can even manage their attention on demand) one class at a time or one cocurricular program intervention at a time but we fail to create opportunities for them to make cross-course connections to refl ect on how they are developing their identity from one cocurricular program to how they are managing stress in another cocurricular program, we are reinforcing students not making neural connections that are imperative to their ability to succeed. Where do we facilitate the connection to what they are learning and how they are developing with their refl ection about what gives them meaning and purpose so they can gain clarity on what they want to create with their life? Where do we do that for ourselves? Findings indicate that it is not happening for the majority of students (OECD, 2013). Thus, we should not be surprised to see that the learning and development we intentionally delivered in a segmented manner is not made evident in data we have collected in a segmented manner. This leads to the criticism of whether the American higher education degree has any value.

As human beings, we can only focus on one thing at a time (Orr & Weissman, 2009; Rubenstein et al., 2001; Weissman, Gopalakrishnan, Hazlett, & Woldorff, 2005; Weissman, Perkins, & Woldorff, 2008). The ability to span our attention successfully rests in our ability to intentionally move our attention from one task to another swiftly and effectively while making connections to the important patterns needed for innovative problem solving or whatever it is we are being asked to do (Carp, Fitzgerald, Taylor, & Weissman, 2012; Weissman & Carp, 2013). However, creative problem solving may be more complex than simply intentionally managing our intention (Kandiko, 2012; Kaufman & Sternberg, 2007; Livingston, 2010; Plucker & Makel, 2010).

Thus, the first apparent step in this entire process appears to be regulating our awareness of where our attention resides (attention regulation or AR). AR refers to processes that modify alerting, orienting, and executive attention and does not involve training in reasoning or linguistic processing. Instead, AR involves training in the ability to focus on a selected object, with awareness, while inhibiting irrelevant distracter stimuli. Because attention is the gateway to all other higher-order cognitive abilities and emotional responses, slight modifications in attentional deployment may have large effects on emotion generation (Posner & Fan, 2004) and also cognitive abilities.

Goldin and Gross (2010) reported that subjects who engaged in breathfocused attention tasks (AR) actually reduced their amygdala activity (equating to reduced reported levels of anxiety) and subjects increased the level of activity in other brain areas localized for attention and other executive functions such as analytical reasoning, prioritizing, and decision making (including the insula, other sensor-motor processing areas, Anterior Cingulate Cortex, and prefrontal cortex). Goldin is not the only one to report such findings; focused breathing’s correlation with abating anxiety and expanding attention or emotions (emotion regulation or ER) has been validated and extended in various studies (Arch & Craske, 2006; 2010; Batten & Hayes, 2005; Hocking & Koenig, 1995; Mankus, Aldao, Kerns, Mayville, & Mennin, 2013; Roemer, Orsillo, & Salters-Pedneault, 2008). We can postulate that such reported changes in improved attention (AR) and ability to regulate decreased stress and anxiety (ER) would likely increase student’ overall well-being and their overall success through awareness of choice (cognitive regulation or CR).

For us to further emphasize the importance of AR, ER, and CR needed in a training model that promotes faculty, administrative, and student success, Goldin’s and other’s research (Anderson, Goldin, Kurita, & Gross, 2008; Goldin & Gross 2010; Goldin, Hakimi, Manber, Canli, & Gross, 2009a; Goldin, Manber-Ball, Werner, Heimberg, & Gross, 2009b; Goldin, Ramel, & Gross 2009c; Goldin et al., 2008; Hutcherson, Goldin, Ramel, McRae, & Gross, 2008) posited that emotions coordinate a human’s experiential, behavioral, and physiological responses to perceived challenges and opportunities. In other words, emotions dictate perception and thus emotions dictate how one responds to events they encounter; emotions can dictate choice. If left untrained, these emotions interfere with our cognitive processing ability (CR) and may lead to students’ inability to persist.

Resilience is defined as the ability to “bounce back” after stressful events and trauma while preserving normal-for-the-individual physical and psychological equilibrium (Bonanno, 2004; Lazarus, 1993; Zautra, Hall, & Murray, 2010). Resilient individuals are able to overcome challenges and misfortune, learn from these challenges, and reach out for new experiences, ultimately allowing them to adapt to change in a healthy way, which in turn enhances well-being (Block & Kremen, 1996; Zautra et al., 2010). No one is immune to life’s traumas and the negative effects of stress; however, the difference between well-being and psychological illness can be determined by the degree of effective coping and adaptation abilities one possesses to build resilience (Tugade & Fredrickson, 2004). The brain can be considered the primary organ of resilience because it regulates the biologic feedback systems that respond and adapt to stress (Karatsoreos & McEwen, 2011). The importance of training the brain becomes even more compelling when one considers how the inability to regulate attention, emotion, and cognition can take a student, a faculty member, and an administrator out of their intended life course.

Detrimental effects of repeated chronic stress are seen in areas of behavior such as self-control and self-regulation (e.g., attention, emotion, and cognitive regulation), fl exible thinking, memory, physiologic responses to immune function, infl ammatory processes, heart disease, and autoimmune disease (Cohen, Janicki-Deverts, & Miller, 2007; Hölzel et al., 2010; McEwen, 2009; Shors, 2006). Furthermore, the state of being “stressed out” can result in sleep deprivation (four hours or less per night), which has been associated with obesity, cognitive impairment, and unhealthy lifestyle behaviors (McEwen, 2006). Neuroimaging studies have confirmed stress-induced brain alterations trigger an enlargement of the amygdala (our emotion center), and a reduced size of the hippocampus (memory), as well as a reduced size of the brain’s chief executive officer—the prefrontal cortex (Davidson & McEwen, 2012).

The good news is that the brain is trainable—AR, ER, CR, and selfregulation are all trainable. Hölzel et al.’s (2011a) meta-analysis exemplified the effectiveness that specific training interventions can have on cultivating— AR, body awareness, ER, and CR. Namely, participants in this study were able to improve their own attention, emotion, and cognitive regulation abilities by engaging in the specific training methodologies provided. Similarly, Hölzel et al.’s (2011b) research further confirmed these findings using functional and structural neuroimaging (fMRI and MRI; see Chapter 1 for a detailed description of these measurement tools). These publications were some of the first to provide empirical evidence that specific attention, emotion, and cognitive regulation training methodologies are associated with neuroplasticity changes in the brain. Markedly, the brain regions affected parallel those in learning and development. A few examples include the anterior cingulate cortex, insula, temporoparietal junction (the division between the temporal lobe and parietal lobe), fronto-limbic network, and default mode network (structures within the prefrontal cortex that communicate during resting states). Together with Hölzel, many publications continue to replicate (and extend) these initial findings, substantially validating the power these training methodologies have on inducing structural and functional changes in the brain (Converse, Ahlers, Travers, & Davidson, 2014; Flook, Goldberg, Pinger, & Davidson, 2015).

Research in clinical psychology and neuroscience reinforces the signifcance of extrapolating these findings to guide the design, delivery, and evaluation of higher education. For example, clinical psychology research tells us that negative self-thoughts are inversely related to self-efficacy and positively related to stress (Multon, Brown, & Lent, 1991; Schunk, 1985; Zimmerman, 2000). CR, which is the ability to observe, analyze, focus, and refl ect into thoughts, allows an individual to choose which thoughts he or she refl ects and subsequently acts on. This regulatory strategy has been shown to decrease anxiety (Mahone, Bruch, & Heimberg, 1993) as well enhance overall well-being (Kabat-Zinn, 2013; Segal, Williams, & Teasdale, 2013) through positive choice making.

Because we now understand that we can train this kind of intentional AR, as well as ER and CR in ourselves and in our students, this book is filled with chapters that detail the intricacies of how we can train such traits. Further, we are confident that when this book goes to press, additional research will continue to emerge to deepen our understanding of the effectiveness of each AR, ER, and CR training practice. For now, suffice it to say that simple, yet not easy, low-cost mind-training methodology that uses focused breathing, focused movement, and other inquiry methods can improve attention (Lutz et al., 2008; Valentine, & Sweet, 1999) and reduce mind wandering (Mrazek, Franklin, Phillips, Baird, & Schooler, 2013). In addition, these training methods are known to improve psychological well-being (Brown & Ryan, 2003) and reduce levels of stress and anxiety (Astin, 1997; Jain et al., 2007; Rosenzweig, Reibel, Greeson, Brainard, & Hojat, 2009; Shapiro, Schwartz, & Bonner, 1998), as well as improve cognitive constructs and physiological states (Grossman, Niemann, Schmidt, & Walach, 2004). Use of these training methods has also been known to improve working memory as well as increase performance on standardized tests (Mrazek et al., 2013). Such practices also increase creativity (Capurso, Fabbro & Crescentini, 2014; Greenberg, Reiner, & Merian, 2012; Langer, 2005; Ostafin & Kassman, 2012; Ren et al., 2011); problem solving (Murray & Byrne, 2005; Ren et al., 2011); logic thinking (Ostafin & Kassman, 2012; Ren et al., 2011); and executive functions (Heeren, Van Broeck & Philippot, 2009; Jha, Krompinger, & Baime, 2007; Moore & Malinowski, 2009; Zeidan, Johnson, Diamond, David, & Goolkasian, 2010).

When we add to this list of desired outcomes that of compassion, we begin to see how we can decrease the negative impact of bias and inhumane treatment (whether overt or covert) that can lead to happier, healthier, and more productive citizens and a workforce (Batson & Ahmad, 2009; Chiao & Mathur, 2010; Cikara & Fiske, 2011; Stephan & Finlay, 1999). We also now know that we can train compassion, which is known to create connection to others, thus decreasing bias and bigotry while enriching interpersonal relationships (Jazaieri et al., 2013; Neff, 2007; Singer et al., 2004; Singer et al., 2006).

We understand that fostering student success requires tending to the whole person (Abes, Jones & McEwen, 2007; Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010; Goleman, 2001; Kegan, 1982; Kegan, 1994; Kohlberg, 1969; Magolda, 1999; Magolda, 2001; Pizzolato, 2008; Pizzolato & Ozaki, 2007; Taylor, 2008). In the previous chapters in this book, we detailed very specific ways to foster holistic student success. We know that students take their emotional selves with them everywhere they go and they interact with what is presented to them with their emotions, ether aware of them or not. We, as faculty, administrators, and community partners do the same. After all, the business of higher education is a human business. We are an industry that was built to develop human beings—human beings interacting with human beings regardless of how much we use technology to interface or carry out our work. As such, this is a messy business. Our ability to intentionally train our own, let alone our students’ attention, emotion, and cognitive regulation in and out of the classroom may be a primary component for students’ success as well as the industry of higher education’s success.

In this book, we have posited that the holistic learning and development journey is not to be found in the linear course-to-course design, but it is to be found in the process of refl ecting on human engagement in and out of the classroom—as messy as that may be. We have posited that the commodity of higher education is not the course-by-course, credit-hour-accumulated degree, rather the commodity of higher education is the human process of learning and development that can be measured through direct evidence gathered in refl ective learning portfolios. If we believe this and we have plenty of neuroscience evidence (illustrated throughout this book) to affirm this postulation, then this would require us to design integrative inquiry processes (INIQ) that invite us all to combine the processes of (a) integrating the knowledge gained from research, course learning, and book learning with (b) the wisdom gained from intuition, sensing, and the mindful experiencing of emotions with (c) the ability to embrace the unknown, to be curious, and to inquire into that which we cannot yet see. If we integrate this approach with the ability to join multiple sources of information through generative questions and other training methodologies, participants of this integrative inquiry process are more likely to manage stress and creatively problem solve, while also experiencing ambiguity and compassion. This may just all lead to resolving problems we haven’t even identified yet, while promoting peace, equity, access, affordability, resiliency, and wisdom through compassionate, conscious choice making.

References

Abes, E. S., Jones, S. R., & McEwen, M. K. (2007). Reconceptualizing the model of multiple dimensions of identity: The role of meaning-making capacity in the construction of multiple identities. Journal of College Student Development, 48(1), 1–22.

Alvarez, J., & Emory, E. (2006). Executive function and the frontal lobes: A metaanalytic review. Neuropsychology Review, 16(1), 17–42.

Anderson, B., Goldin, P., Kurita, K., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Self-representation in social anxiety disorder: Linguistic analysis of autobiographical narratives. Behavior Research and Therapy, 46, 1105–1192.

Arch, J. J., & Craske, M. G. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness: Emotion regulation following a focused breathing induction. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(12), 1849–1858.

Arch, J. J., & Craske, M. G. (2010). Laboratory stressors in clinically anxious and non-anxious individuals: The moderating role of mindfulness. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 48(6), 495–505.

Astin, J. (1997). Stress reduction through mindfulness meditation. Effects on psychological symptomatology, sense of control, and spiritual experiences. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 66(2), 97–106.

Batson, C., & Ahmad, N. (2009). Using empathy to improve intergroup attitudes and relations. Social Issues and Policy Review, 3(1), 141–177.

Batten, S. V., & Hayes, S. C. (2005). Acceptance and commitment therapy in the treatment of comorbid substance abuse and post-traumatic stress disorder: A case study. Clinical Case Studies, 4(3), 246–262.

Block, J., & Kremen, A. M. (1996). IQ and ego-resiliency: Conceptual and empirical connections and separateness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 349–361.

Bonanno, G. A. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? American Psychologist, 59(1), 20–28.

AFTERWORD: ADOPTION, ADAPTATION, AND TRANSFORMATION 329 Brown, K., & Ryan, R. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848.

Capurso, V., Fabbro, F., & Crescentini, C. (2014). Mindful creativity: The infl uence of mindfulness meditation on creative thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1020–1021.

Carp, J., Fitzgerald, K. D., Taylor, S. F., & Weissman, D. H. (2012). Removing the effect of response time on brain activity reveals developmental differences in confl ict processing in the posterior medial prefrontal cortex. NeuroImage, 59, 853–860.

Chan, R., Shum, D., Toulopoulou, T., & Chen, E. (2008). Assessment of executive functions: Review of instruments and identification of critical issues. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology: The Official Journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 23(2), 201–216.

Chiesa, A., Calati, R., & Serretti, A. (2011). Does mindfulness training improve cognitive abilities? A systematic review of neuropsychological findings. Clinical Psychology Review, 31(3), 449–464.

Chiao, J., & Mathur, V. (2010). Intergroup empathy: How does race affect empathic neural responses? Current Biology, 20(11), R478–R480.

Cikara, M., & Fiske, S. (2011). Bounded empathy: Neural responses to outgroup targets’ (mis)fortunes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(12), 3791–3803.

Cohen, S., Janicki-Deverts, D., & Miller, G. (2007). Psychological stress and disease. Journal of the American Medical Association, 298(14), 1685–1687.

Converse, A. K., Ahlers, E. O., Travers, B. G., & Davidson, R. J. (2014). Tai chi training reduces self-report of inattention in healthy young adults. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8. Retrieved from http://www.investigatinghealthyminds. org/ScientificPublications/2014/ConverseTaiChiFHN.pdf.

Davidson, J., & McEwen, B. (2012). Social infl uences on neuroplasticity: Stress and interventions to promote well-being. Nature Neuroscience, 15(5), 689–695.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Flook, L., Goldberg, S. B., Pinger, L., & Davidson, R. J. (2015). Promoting prosocial behavior and self-regulatory skills in preschool children through a mindfulness- based kindness curriculum. Developmental Psychology, 51(1), 44–51.

Goldin, P., & Gross, J. (2010). Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) on emotion regulation in social anxiety disorder. Emotion, 10(1), 83–91.

Goldin, P. R., Hakimi, S., Manber, T., Canli, T., & Gross, J. J. (2009a). Neural bases of social anxiety disorder: Emotional reactivity and cognitive regulation during social and physical threat. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66, 170–180.

Goldin, P., Manber-Ball, T., Werner, K., Heimberg, R., & Gross, J. J. (2009b). Neural mechanisms of cognitive reappraisal of negative self-beliefs in social anxiety disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 66, 1091–1099.

330 THE NEUROSCIENCE OF LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT Goldin, P. R., Ramel, W., & Gross, J. J. (2009c). Mindfulness meditation training and self-referential processing in social anxiety disorder: Behavioral and neural effects. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 23, 242–257.

Goldin, P. R., McRae, K., Ramel, W., & Gross, J. J. (2008). The neural bases of emotion regulation: Reappraisal and suppression of negative emotion. Biological Psychiatry, 63, 577–586.

Goleman, D. (2001). An EI-based theory of performance. The emotionally intelligent workplace: How to select for, measure, and improve emotional intelligence in individuals, groups, and organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Greenberg, J., Reiner, K., & Meiran, N. (2012). “Mind the trap”: Mindfulness practice reduces cognitive rigidity. PLOS ONE, 7(5), e36206–e36207.

Grossman, P., Niemann, L., Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2004). Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 57(1), 35–43.

Heeren, A., Van Broeck, N., & Philippot, P. (2009). The effects of mindfulness on executive processes and autobiographical memory specificity. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47(5), 403–409.

Hocking, L. B., & Koenig, H. G. (1995). Anxiety in medically ill older patients: A review and update. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, 25(3), 221– 238.

Hölzel, B., Carmody, J., Vangel, M., Congleton, C., Yerramsetti, S., Gard, T., & Lazar, S. W. (2011a). Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain gray matter density. Psychiatry Research-neuroimaging, 191(1), 36–43.

Hölzel, B. K., Lazar, S. W., Gard, T., Schuman-Olivier, Z., Vago, D. R., & Ott, U. (2011b). How does mindfulness meditation work? Proposing mechanisms of action from a conceptual and neural perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(6), 537–559.

Hutcherson, C. A., Goldin, P. R., Ramel, W., McRae, K., & Gross, J. J. (2008). Attention and emotion infl uence the relationship between extraversion and neural response. Social, Cognitive, Affective Neuroscience, 3, 71–79.

Jain, S., Shapiro, S., Swanick, S., Roesch, S., Mills, P., Bell, I., & Schwartz, G. E. (2007). A randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation versus relaxation training: Effects on distress, positive states of mind, rumination, and distraction. Annals of Behavioral Medicine: A Publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 33(1), 11–21.

Jazaieri, H., Jinpa, G., McGonigal, K.,Rosenberg, E., Finkelstein, J., Simon- Thomas, E., … Goldin, P. R. (2013). Enhancing compassion: A randomized controlled trial of a compassion cultivation training program. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(4), 1113–1126.

Jha, A., Krompinger, J., & Baime, M. (2007). Mindfulness training modifies subsystems of attention. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(2), 109–119.

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2013). Full catastrophe living, revised edition: How to cope with stress, pain and illness using mindfulness meditation. New York, NY: Bantam Books.

Kandiko, C. B. (2012). Leadership and creativity in higher education: The role of interdisciplinarity. London Review of Education, 10(2), 191–200.

AFTERWORD: ADOPTION, ADAPTATION, AND TRANSFORMATION 331 Kaku, M. (2014).

The future of the mind: The scientific quest to understand, enhance, and empower the mind. New York, NY: Random House.

Karatsoreos, I., & McEwen, B. (2011). Psychobiological allostasis: Resistance, resilience and vulnerability. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(12), 576–584.

Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Resource review: Creativity. Change, 39, 55–58.

Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental complexity of modern life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. New York, NY: Rand McNally.

Kozasa, E., Sato, J., Lacerda, S., Barreiros, M., Radvany, J., Russell, T., Sanches, L., Mello, L., & Amaro, E. (2011). Meditation training increases brain efficiency in an attention task. NeuroImage, 59(1), 745–749.

Langer, E. (2005). On becoming an artist: Reinventing yourself through mindful creativity. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.

Lazarus, R. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology, 44(1), 1–21.

Livingston, L. (2010). Teaching creativity in higher education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(2), 59–62.

Lutz, A., Slagter, H., Dunne, J., & Davidson, R. (2008). Attention regulation and monitoring in meditation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(4), 163–169.

Magolda, B. (1999). Creating contexts for learning and self authorship: Constructivedevelopmental pedagogy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Magolda, B. (2001). Making their own way: Narratives for transforming higher education to promote self-development. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Mahone, E. M., Bruch, M. A., & Heimberg, R. G. (1993). Focus of attention and social anxiety: The role of negative self-thoughts and perceived positive attributes of the other. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 17(3), 209–224.

Mankus, A. M., Aldao, A., Kerns, C., Mayville, E. W., & Mennin, D. S. (2013). Mindfulness and heart rate variability in individuals with high and low generalized anxiety symptoms. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 51(7), 386–391.

McEwen, B. (2006). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators: Central role of the brain. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 8(4), 367–381.

McEwen, B. (2009). The brain is the central organ of stress and adaptation. Neuro- Image, 47(3), 911–913.

Moore, A., & Malinowski, P. (2009). Meditation, mindfulness and cognitive fl exibility. Consciousness & Cognition, 18(1), 176–186.

Mrazek, M., Franklin, M., Phillips, D., Baird, B., & Schooler, J. (2013). Mindfulness training improves working memory capacity and GRE performance while reducing mind wandering. Psychological Science, 24(5), 776–781.

332 THE NEUROSCIENCE OF LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 30–38.

OECD Skills Outlook. (2013). First results from the survey of adult skills. Retrieved from skills.oecd.org/documents/OECD_Skills_Outlook_2013.pdf.

Orr, J. M., & Weissman, D. H. (2009). Anterior cingulate cortex makes two contributions to minimizing distraction. Cerebral Cortex, 19, 703–711.

Ostafin, B., & Kassman, K. (2012). Stepping out of history: Mindfulness improves insight problem solving. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(2), 1031–1036.

Pizzolato, J. E. (2008). Advisor, teacher, partner: Using the learning partnerships model to reshape academic advising. About Campus, 13(1), 18–25.

Pizzolato, J. E., & Ozaki, C. C. (2007). Moving toward self-authorship: Investigating outcomes of learning partnerships. Journal of College Student Development, 48(2), 196–214.

Plucker, J. A., & Makel, M. C. (2010). Assessment of creativity. In J. C. Kaufman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 48–73). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Posner, M. I., & Fan, J. (2004). Attention as an organ system. Topics in integrative neuroscience: From cells to cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Ren, J., Huang, Z., Luo, J., Wei, G., Ying, X., Ding, Z., Wu, Y., & Luo, F. (2011).

Meditation promotes insightful problem-solving by keeping people in a mindful and alert conscious state. Science China. Life Sciences, 54(10), 961–965.

Roemer, L., Orsillo, S. M., & Salters-Pedneault, K. (2008). Efficacy of an acceptance- based behavior therapy for generalized anxiety disorder: Evaluation in a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(6), 1083.

Rosenzweig, S., Reibel, D., Greeson, J., Brainard, G., & Hojat, M. (2003). Mindfulness- based stress reduction lowers psychological distress in medical students. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 15(2), 88–92.

Scharmer, O. (2007). Theory U: Leading from the future as it emerges. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and classroom learning. Psychology in the Schools, 22(2), 208–223.

Segal, Z. V., Williams, M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2013). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depression (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., & Dutton, J. (2012). Schools that learn: A fifth discipline field book for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. New York, NY: Crown Publishing.

Shapiro, S., Schwartz, G., & Bonner, G. (1998). Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on medical and premedical students. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 21(6), 581–599.

Shors, T. (2006). Stressful experience and learning across the lifespan. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 55–85.

AFTERWORD: ADOPTION, ADAPTATION, AND TRANSFORMATION 333 Singer, T., Seymour, B., O’Doherty, J., Stephan, K. E., Dolan, R., & Frith, C. D. (2006). Empathic neural responses are modulated by the perceived fairness of others. Nature, 439(7075), 466–469.

Singer, T., Seymour, B., O’Doherty, J., Kaube, H., Dolan, R., & Frith, C. D. (2004). Empathy for pain involves the affective but not sensory components of pain. Science, 303(5661), 1157–1162.

Stephan, W., & Finlay, K. (1999). The role of empathy in improving intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 729–743.

Taylor, E. W. (2008). Transformative learning theory. New directions for adult and continuing education, 2008(119), 5–15.

Todd, R., Cunningham, W., Anderson, A., & Thompson, E. (2012). Affect-biased attention as emotion regulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(7), 365–372.

Tugade, M., & Fredrickson, B. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 320–333.

Valentine, E., & Sweet, P. (1999). Meditation and attention: A comparison of the effects of concentrative and mindfulness meditation on sustained attention. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 2(1), 59–70.

Weissman, D. H. & Carp, J. (2013). The congruency effect on the posterior medial frontal cortex is more consistent with time on task than with response confl ict. PLOS ONE, 8(4), e62405.

Weissman, D. H., Gopalakrishnan, A., Hazlett, C., & Woldorff, M. (2005). Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex resolves confl ict from distracting stimuli by boosting attention toward relevant events. Cerebral Cortex, 15(2), 229–237.

Weissman, D. H., Perkins, A. P., & Woldorff, M. G. (2008). Cognitive control in social situations: A role for the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. NeuroImage, 40, 955–962.

Zautra, A., Hall, J., & Murray, K. (2010). Resilience: A new definition of health for people and communities. In J. R. Reich, A. J. Zautra & J. S. Hall (Eds.), Handbook of adult resilience (pp. 3–30). New York, NY: Guilford.

Zeidan, F., Johnson, S. K., Diamond, B. J., David, Z., & Goolkasian, P. (2010). Mindfulness meditation improves cognition: Evidence of brief mental training. Conscious Cognition, 19(2), 597–605.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82–91

Copyright ©  2015 The Rushing to Yoga Foundation 1155 Camino del Mar, #142 Del Mar, CA 92014