What is the Mind, Body, and Soul Connection?
- Star Moore
- Apr 19
- 3 min read
The Current Scope of Research
Typically, when conducting research, psychologists identify and isolate specific factors (i.e., variables) they want to study, controlling for confounds (external factors) as much as possible, ensuring that they are measuring/testing what they say they are and not some hidden variable. And boy, is there a lot to learn; in fact, many labs are dedicated to the exploration of a few variables within specific demographics (e.g., anxiety sensitivity and sleep amongst smokers). While that may seem incredibly specific, a researcher can spend decades conducting numerous studies examining the relationship between these factors in this population from different lines of inquiry.
For instance, do individuals with higher anxiety sensitivity who smoke report more sleep disturbance than non-smokers? How does that vary based on age? Is there a difference between vapers and cigarette smokers? If we create an intervention that specifically targets sleep quality, does that help cigarette smokers quit? Does it work for individuals with low anxiety sensitivity as well? Does it work for multiple races? The list goes on and on as potential mediators or moderators (i.e., mechanisms of action), and different interventions are added to the equation.
Mechanisms of action are underlying factors through which therapeutic interventions elicit change in cognition, behavior, and emotions.¹ These days, it's an especially popular focus in behavioral and intervention clinical trials, as understanding the how and why can lead to more targeted treatments.
However, human beings are a complex and intricate assortment of systems, networks, thoughts, emotions, and more. I fear that in chasing efficiency, researchers have become captivated by the abstraction of theoretical and empirical processes, narrowing their scope to the point that they no longer see the person. And what is the pursuit of knowledge without consideration for concrete application, if not conquest?
How the Mind, Body, and Soul Connection is Different
The premise of the Mind, Body, and Soul Connection (MBSC) is that the mind (cognition), the body (behavior), separated into two distinct domains–regulatory and impulsive, and the soul (emotion), are inextricably linked, each having its own relationship with the others and varying in dominance. Most Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) modalities view cognition as the driving factor and thus focus on changing negative thought processes to change emotions and behavior. However, I don't think that's necessarily the case for everyone, and this variation accounts for why people who experience similar traumas or stressors present differently.
For instance, two brothers who are only a couple of years apart grow up in the same emotionally and physically abusive household. Both develop complex PTSD (C-PTSD), but one also has a substance use disorder (SUD); the other brother does not, but there are prominent accompanying dissociative features with his C-PTSD. How the MBSC framework might explain this is that the impulsive body domain is favored, perhaps overactive, in the brother with SUD, and the mind domain is dominant in the brother with dissociative tendencies.
Rather than the common triangular CBT model, it's really more of a prism (see Figure 1).
Figure 1
Similar to network models, the direction and strength of each relationship differ, and altering one relationship will affect the others, requiring a more dynamic and comprehensive approach to care. It's not enough to only focus on changing how we think, regulating our emotions, or adopting healthier behaviors; we need to help patients do ALL of these things via a structured, personalized approach that meets them where they're at, with the understanding that where they're at changes over the course of treatment.
Next Steps
As of now, these are all conjectures based on my observations and experience working in clinical settings, but this is what I hope to work on in graduate school. The first step–aside from getting into school– is to develop a self-report scale that can a) validate the existence of these four distinct domains, and b) accurately measure the relationship between them. This will give clinicians a better understanding of which form of therapy to employ first and when it's time to change modalities to address the next dynamic in need of attention.
I'm in the process of creating this measure and welcome collaborators with experience in psychometrics or scale development! If that's not quite in your wheelhouse but you still want to support, please feel free to fill out the contact form, and I'll be sure to send you the questionnaire when I'm ready for data collection.
Thank you for your support!
References
¹Alavi, S.B. and Sanderson, W.C. (2015). Mechanisms of Action in Psychotherapy. In R.L. Cautin and
S.O. Lilienfeld (eds.) The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology. Wiley: New York.
Comments