Contemplation and Internal Communication of Personality: between the Conscious and the Unconscious

Background and Problem. The fundamental problem of the relationship between the conscious and the unconscious remains central to the contemporary science of consciousness. Despite progress in objective methods, there is a paucity of research examining specific mental processes that mediate this relationship, particularly from the first-person perspective. Objective. This study aims to determine the dynamic relationship between conscious and unconscious activity within two key processes: contemplation and the inner communication of personality. Methods. The research employs an integrative approach combining theoretical analysis and empirical data. The phenomenology of contemplation was investigated using the author’s “Contemplative Activity Questionnaire” (sample: N > 200, young adults aged 17–35). The study of inner communication was conducted using a specially designed questionnaire to assess its types, forms, means, and functions. Results. 1. Contemplation is conceptualized as a class of boundary states characterized by awareness of being in the state itself without conscious access to its specific content. Its procedural, content-related, situational, and functional aspects were empirically identified. 2. Inner communication is defined as a complex phenomenon that extends beyond inner speech to include dialogue with virtual “others,” utilizing poly-modal sign systems. Data confirm its ubiquity and structural similarity to L.S. Vygotsky’s model of inner speech, while demonstrating an expanded repertoire of means in adults. Conclusion. The study demonstrates that contemplation and inner communication represent two complementary forms of a reciprocal connection between consciousness and the unconscious, exhibiting opposing dynamics. Contemplation constitutes a spontaneous, “ascending” transition from the unconscious to the awareness of meanings. Inner communication serves as a more guided, “descending” process of reflection from conscious meanings to deeper layers. Their investigation contributes to solving the classical psychological problem and opens new perspectives for applied fields of psychology.

Созерцание и внутренняя коммуникация личности:
между сознанием и бессознательным

Г.В. Акопов^а, Л.С. Акопян^б

^аСамарский филиал Московского городского педагогического университета, Самара, Россия

^bСамарский государственный социально-педагогический университет, Самара, Россия

Резюме. Актуальность и проблема. Фундаментальная проблема взаимосвязи сознания и бессознательного остается центральной в современной науке о сознании. Несмотря на прогресс объективных методов, сохраняется дефицит исследований, рассматривающих конкретные ментальные процессы, опосредующие эту взаимосвязь, в частности, с позиции первого лица.
Цель. Данная работа направлена на определение динамического соотношения сознательной и бессознательной активности в двух ключевых процессах: созерцании и внутренней коммуникации личности. Методы. Исследование опирается на интеграцию теоретического анализа и эмпирических данных. Феноменология созерцания изучалась с помощью авторского «Опросника созерцательной активности» (выборка: N > 200, молодые люди 17–35 лет). Исследование внутренней коммуникации проводилось с использованием специально разработанного опросника для оценки её типов, форм, средств и функций. Результаты. 1. Созерцание концептуализировано как класс пограничных состояний, для которых характерна осведомленность о факте пребывания в состоянии при неосознаваемости его конкретного содержания. Эмпирически выделены его процессуальный, содержательный, ситуативный и функциональный аспекты. 2. Внутренняя коммуникация определена как комплексный феномен, выходящий за рамки внутренней речи и включающий диалог с виртуальными «другими» с использованием полимодальных знаковых средств. Данные подтверждают её повсеместную распространенность и структурное сходство с моделью внутренней речи Л.С. Выготского при расширенном репертуаре средств у взрослых. Выводы. Показано, что созерцание и внутренняя коммуникация представляют собой две взаимодополняющие формы реципрокной связи сознания и бессознательного, обладающие противоположной динамикой. Созерцание представляет собой спонтанный, «восходящий» переход от бессознательного к осознанию смыслов. Внутренняя коммуникация выступает как более управляемый, «нисходящий» процесс рефлексии от осознанных смыслов к глубинным. Их изучение вносит вклад в решение классической психологической проблемы и открывает перспективы для прикладных областей психологии.

Ключевые слова: сознание, бессознательное, созерцание, внутренняя коммуникация, феноменология, перспектива от первого лица.

Introduction

Major research in the interdisciplinary field of the Science of Consciousness has, for over half a century, highlighted not only the unresolved “hard problem of consciousness” but also the challenge of achieving empirical compatibility between the first-person and third-person perspectives (Akopov, 2021, 2023; Chalmers, 2010). Within both these frameworks, a central and pressing issue is the psychological correlation of unconscious and consciously recognized processes, given their complex interconnection and mutual determination (Honderich, 2014; Revonsuo, 2017; Velmans, 2002).

In contemporary consciousness studies, the concepts of the conscious and the unconscious have significantly transcended the boundaries originally outlined by foundational figures such as S. Freud, C. G. Jung, J. Lacan, K. Jaspers, and others. The categorical apparatus for describing modes of consciousness has expanded considerably to include concepts such as qualia, phenomenal consciousness, cognitive consciousness, access consciousness, representational consciousness, as well as higher- and lower-order theories of consciousness (Genaro, 2012; Vygotsky, 1978). The spectrum of existing theories exploring the reciprocal connection between consciousness and unconscious processes undoubtedly deepens our understanding of this problem. The consolidation of philosophical, social, humanistic, psychological, and natural science approaches, enhanced by modern technical and computational methods, advances both the articulation of the problem of consciousness and the search for its solutions, particularly from perspectives emphasizing its wholeness (Volkova et al., 2021) or unity (Akopov, 2021, 2023).

The aim of the present work is to determine the dynamic relationship between conscious and unconscious activity within the processes of contemplation and inner communication. Previous research has identified substantive similarities and differences between the phenomena of contemplation (characterized by detachment from the external world) and mind-wandering, as well as between inner communication and mindfulness (Akopov & Akopian, 2024). This study hypothesizes an opposing dynamic of awareness and reflection in the phenomena of contemplation and inner communication. It is proposed that contemplation is realized through a transcendent transition from the unconscious to the awareness of micro- and macro-level meanings of life activity. Inner communication, according to the hypothesis, proceeds from first-order conscious meanings toward previously unconscious second-order meanings.

Method

Contemplation: From the Unconscious to Awareness

The concept of contemplation is present in the language and culture of many peoples. The diversity of its meanings allows us to distinguish everyday, linguistic, philosophical, religious, and psychological semantic groups, based on corresponding vernacular, scientific, and social representations. Within psychology, interpretations of contemplation are associated with: a) the perceptual sphere (perception, observation, viewing); b) the cognitive sphere (immediate cognition, comprehension, reflection, intuition, insight); c) altered states of consciousness, such as “passive self-absorption into one’s inner world,” trance, or “meditation at the moment of exhausted contact with the object” (de Wit, 1991; Melik-Pashaev, 2024; Petrenko & Kucherenko, 2007; Shestun & Podorovskaya, 2014).

Based on pilot studies, the “Contemplative Activity Questionnaire” (Akopov, Akopian, Belous, 2024) was developed to assess respondents’ ideas about contemplation and their personal experience of this state. Empirical research conducted since 2011 on a sample of young people aged 17 to 35 from various professional fields (Samara, N > 200) has revealed consistent responses. On average, 42% of participants define this state as “immersion into oneself” (“into one’s own world,” “into one’s thoughts, feelings, dreams,” “withdrawal into oneself,” “detachment from the external world,” etc.). Slightly more respondents (46%) describe contemplation as a state of calm (“resignation,” “enjoyment” (including aesthetic), “peace,” “oneness with the world”). The remaining 12% identify it with a single word — “pensiveness” (Akopov, 2014a; Akopov, 2014b; Akopov & Bakshutova, 2013).

When selecting conditions that stimulate visual contemplation from those offered in the questionnaire, participants equally noted: “a view from a mountain peak,” “the sea distance,” “clouds floating in the sky,” “the horizon,” “a burning fire,” “a flowing river.” Some added “starry sky” and “a view of the bright moon.” In their opinion, auditory contemplation is equally stimulated by “the sound of the sea” and “birds singing,” less so by “a drawn-out song,” and very rarely by “the ticking of a clock” or “audible quiet conversation.” Participants associated psychomotor activity conducive to contemplation with walking and monotonous actions.

The quantitative distribution of stimulating situations is as follows: visual stimuli — 71%, auditory — 36%, kinesthetic — 21%. Analysis of the descriptions of the contemplation experience revealed significant variability in its content: “thoughts come by themselves, and you think about everything and nothing,” “at one moment — thoughts and memories, at another — just emptiness,” being “in a state of absence of any thoughts” or, conversely, “reassessment of a life situation, but without emotions or regret.” It was also noted: “sometimes, when you think about a situation or question for a long time, you drive yourself into this state” and “during contemplation, internal activity occurs unconsciously, non-consciously” (Akopov, 2014a; Akopov, 2014b).

The totality of responses to clarifying questions allowed us to identify four aspects of the contemplation experience:

Process aspect: characterized by “immersion or withdrawal into oneself,” “cessation of internal dialogue,” “calm,” “mental harmony,” “enjoyment of what is happening,” a “sense of a third person” or “observer.”

Content aspect: defined by the themes of reflection — “thinking about what is important in life,” “about love for nature and people, about fate,” “looking at beauty, nature… and immediately thinking about one’s life,” as well as the spontaneous emergence of unanalyzed material and the emotionless assessment of situations.

Situational aspect: contemplation arises “in a natural environment,” “when one is alone,” “when looking at or listening to something beautiful or calm.”

Functional (effective) aspect: contemplation helps to “correctly analyze what is happening,” “gain experience,” “achieve harmony with oneself”; leads to “calming of the mind,” “reassessment of events without emotion… as an observer from the outside,” a feeling of “lightness and joy” after the state.

The presented phenomenology does not allow us to speak of the individual’s full awareness of the contemplation process. Only the fact of being in this state is clearly conscious, but not its specific content (except for the pre- and post-contemplative phases, when some elements of mental activity become accessible). In this context, considering contemplation as a phenomenon on the border with the unconscious, we believe it is not identical to either Freudian libido or Jungian archetypes. It also differs from meditation, which is intentional, prepared, and conscious, whereas contemplation arises spontaneously (Petrenko & Kucherenko, 2007). In English-language research and practice, the concept of contemplation is often reduced to meditation, which narrows its scope and does not cover the entire spectrum of mental phenomena described above (Akopov & Akopian, 2021; Sparby & Weger, 2019; Terje, 2017).

A key functional feature of contemplation is the internal, hidden processing, correction, or transformation of the micro- and macro-meanings of a person’s life activity. It is important that this process is content-wise hidden and, as a rule, emotionally positive for the individual. Contemplation can be qualified as a spontaneously achieved mental state, akin to the concept of “subjective well-being” in positive psychology. The empirically identified function of contemplation allows us to identify it as a form of spontaneous “self-therapy,” distinct from meditation; the conditions for its induction, positive emotional consequences, and semantic effects have also been determined (Akopov, 2014a; Akopov & Akopian, 2021).

Repeated analysis of participants’ descriptions confirms the significant variability in the content of contemplation, ranging from the free flow of thoughts to complete emptiness of consciousness and non-judgmental reassessment of life situations (Akopov & Belous, 2021; Alderson-Day & Fernyhough, 2015).

A personological approach to the stable, characterological manifestations of contemplation allows us to consider it as a property of individuality. The “Predominant Type of Consciousness Test” (Akopov, Dergunova, Semenova, 2022), developed based on our research, allows for the diagnosis of an active or contemplative type of personality consciousness. These characteristics are comparable to two of the four personality types identified by E.V. Volkova and A. Kalugin in a large sample of young people — the “active person” and the “spiritual person” (Volkova & Kalugin, 2021).

Results

Inner Communication of Personality: From Consciousness to the Unconscious

An individual reveals themselves through communicative processes not only in the realm of external, interpersonal acts but also in inner dialogue, where they maintain and develop the mental and regulatory structures of their “Self.” In the works of L.S. Vygotsky and J. Piaget, the phenomenon of inner speech in children is directly linked to communication and the social context (Zavershneva & van der Veer, 2019). In foreign research, inner speech is considered not only within the framework of cognitive functions but also as a tool for behavioral regulation, planning, control, and self-control. In comprehensive review spanning research from the late 20th century to 2015, B. Alderson-Day and Ch. Fernyhough outline its wide range of functions: self-regulation, self-knowledge, social and metacognitive understanding, awareness, planning, memorization, and decision-making (Alderson-Day & Fernyhough, 2015).

In the Russian-language scientific tradition, the concept of a person’s inner communication serves as a substantive extension of the notion of “inner speech,” encompassing the aforementioned class of mental phenomena (Akopov, 2014; Akopov & Belous, 2021). We define inner communication as a broad range of phenomena covering inner speech and dialogue in cases where two or more mental agents are present. This can involve a doubled “Self,” images of real or fictional subjects, animate and inanimate objects, as well as higher powers. The partner in internal dialogue can be either a real or a virtual subject integrated into the individual’s semantic space. Often, this role is assumed by alternative self-images, subpersonalities, or multiple manifestations of the “Self.”

Inner communication is not reducible solely to dialogue with oneself, traditionally studied as a mechanism of self-consciousness. According to our research, its processes actively employ not only verbal signs but also visual imagery, intonational and sound signals, facial expressions, and bodily kinetics.

It can be assumed that through an “imagined other,” an individual rehearses desired responses, justifies past actions, or models future situations.

The need-motivational aspect of inner communication manifests in intentional acts. Its study requires consideration of a wide range of related phenomena: features of consciousness and the personal semantic sphere, self-awareness, reflection, cultural specifics of communication, and new digital communication formats. We define inner communication as an integrative complex of egocentric and inner speech, communication with oneself, and inner dialogue, united by the criterion of a subject-subject orientation (including a doubled subject) in the process of exchanging signals, symbols, information, emotions, and intentions. The second subject in this duality can be real, virtual, or idealized. Means of transmission can include speech flows, bodily movements, visual, auditory, and kinesthetic images, as well as intonational-sound and fragmentary speech signals. As noted by N.I. Zhinkin, a “certain language” is actualized in inner communication.

The fundamental mental process in inner communication phenomena is the informational, emotional, and intentional exchange of the subject with themselves or a mentally represented other. At certain levels of consciousness, the tools for such exchange are introspection and reflection. Defining introspection functionally solely as perceptual self-observation is, in our view, limited without considering its communicative aspect.

In the delayed manifestations of insight, inspiration, or creative illumination, inner communication can be identified by its anticipatory function, conditioned by the processuality of priming mechanisms. In all these cases, the fundamental question remains about the subject of conscious and unconscious activity: whether it is the goal-setting personality or the neurocognitive brain. In contemporary consciousness science, questions about the procedural and substantive functions of inner communication relate to the “hard problem of consciousness” and the dilemma of attributing consciousness from the first- or third-person perspective (Revonsuo, 2017; Velmans, 2002).

Thus, inner communication, which also manifests in dialogical form, contains substantive characteristics revealed from the first-person perspective (egocentric speech, communication with oneself), the second-person perspective (the image of another), and the third-person perspective (the researcher’s stance). It was precisely the latter with which the scientific formalization of psychology began with W. Wundt, where introspection, essentially a variety of inner communication, served as a tool combining first- and third-person perspectives.

At the individual level, communicative means can include all sign forms of various modalities of consciousness — non-verbal languages of consciousness (Akopov, 2021) — socially actualized or internalized in the process of life activity and social interactions.

To study the specifics of inner communication, we developed a questionnaire to determine its presence, types, forms, means, and functions in respondents’ daily lives. Empirical data confirmed the structural equivalence of the means used in inner speech (according to Vygotsky) and inner communication, while their repertoire in adults proved to be broader.

In studies conducted from 2019 to 2024, the overwhelming majority of participants (90–100%) agreed that inner communication is inherent to all people in certain situations; about 98% were aware of being in a state of intrapersonal dialogue, with this state being permanent (“always”) for half of the respondents.

When selecting qualitative characteristics of the “Self” image, participants most frequently noted the presence of the “Real Self” (0.65), while the “Ideal Self” scored 0.29 and the “Opposite Self” — 0.08. Choices also included “True Self” (0.48), “Self for Oneself” (0.43), “Self for Others” (0.21), “Self in the Past” (0.27), and “Self in the Future” (0.18).
Interestingly, in the studied sample, the image of the ideal “Self” in inner communication processes was significantly less frequent than the real and true “Self.” The self-image for oneself carried significantly more weight than the self-image for others. The self-image in the future was less represented than the self-image in the past. The minimal presence of an opposite self-image may indicate the integrity and coherence of the self-concept among the study participants.
Research into the mechanisms of inner communication as a special form of mental action and personality development — encompassing social understanding, self-knowledge, empathy, self-regulation, planning, and building “Self-Other” relationships — is a priority not only for the sphere of subjective well-being but also in the context of modern challenges such as global confrontation, the development of artificial intelligence, and the transformation of all forms of human life.

Discussion

The concept of “mind-wandering”, borrowed into Russian-language literature from the works of J. Smallwood and J.W. Schooler, shows significant phenomenological proximity to the state of contemplation. In domestic research, it is defined as “the detachment of attention from external ongoing activity and the redirection of attentional focus to an internally endogenously generated stream of information” (Lapina & Chernyshev, 2015, p. 16).

As this definition implies, both states share key aspects: a shift in attentional focus from external objects to the subject’s inner world, a consequent loss of control over external events, as well as spontaneity and the uncontrollability of their onset. However, a fundamental difference exists between them. Contemplation, as noted earlier, is conscious only at the level of being aware of the state itself, whereas mind-wandering constitutes a reflected-upon “active cognitive process” (Lapina & Chernyshev, 2015, p. 19; Revonsuo, 2017).

Mind-wandering is characterized as “a specific state of consciousness associated with the complete or partial detachment of attention from the perception of external information, characterized by high spontaneity and involuntariness” (Lapina et al., 2017, p. 168). It typically involves a shift of attention to thoughts, fantasies, and feelings, a decrease in control over the content of consciousness, and a weakening of cognitive control over the preceding task. This state can manifest as rumination, the incubation of creative solutions (pre-insight), and distractibility. Researchers also note a link between this phenomenon and the personality trait of dreaminess, identifying motivation and affect in situations of discrepancy between the actual state and the standard of activity as its predictors (Lapina & Chernyshev, 2015, p. 17; Petrenko & Kucherenko, 2007). Of particular interest is the documented connection between mind-wandering and reflection and mindfulness practices (Lapina & Chernyshev, 2015, p. 20). Overall, this concept describes an “ambiguous and contradictory state of consciousness” (Lapina & Chernyshev, 2015, p. 24).

The phenomenon of mindfulness, in turn, is based on self-directed processes of purposeful perception of reality and tracking one’s own sensations, emotions, and thoughts without analyzing or evaluating them. Its popularity is largely associated with psychotherapeutic and meditative practices (Lapina et al., 2017). Common to both contemplation and mindfulness are the phases of entering and exiting the state. Furthermore, deep meditation can lead to a state of enlightenment similar to the post-contemplative state. The key difference lies in the fact that contemplation is entirely spontaneous, and its content during deep immersion is non-conscious, whereas mindfulness practice is manageable and implies full awareness of the process. At the same time, the transition to the state of enlightenment within meditation, as in contemplation, remains non-conscious. Thus, the main distinction is in controllability, which in the case of mindfulness is ensured, in our view, not so much by external instruction as by the processes of a person’s inner communication (Akopov, 2014, 2021).

The relationship between inner communication (IC) and mindfulness can be considered through the lens of actualizing various modalities of consciousness (attention, memory, affect, etc.), which in contemporary science are granted the status of independent types of consciousness (e.g., cognitive, affective). Each such type implies its own system of sign formation (“language”), the representations of which are not always reducible to verbal language. Established traditions exist for translating these “languages”: the kinesthetic through mime and dance, the imaginal through painting and sculpture, the intonational-sound through music. In therapeutic mindfulness practices, either the traditional language of Eastern meditations or techniques of total mindful attention with verbal instructions (on “here and now,” non-judgment, self-observation) are used (Pugovkina & Shilnikova, 2014). It is obvious that an element of communication with oneself is present in these practices as well; however, its volume and role are incomparable to the developed processes of inner communication.

Conclusions

In conclusion, it is essential to note that modern consciousness science demonstrates significant progress, particularly in the field of instrumental (apparatus-based) and interdisciplinary research. However, despite the power of objective methods, the problem of studying subjective, “first-person” experience remains central and relevant. This is supported by data indicating that even neurophysiological activity is registered with varying clarity depending on the type of attention (e.g., voluntary compared to involuntary) (Velichkovsky et al., 2016). Consequently, in researching conscious and unconscious phenomena such as contemplation, mind-wandering, mindfulness, and inner communication, first-person data remain an indispensable source of information that complements objective measurements.

The integration of the concepts of contemplation and inner communication into the subject domain of contemporary psychology opens new avenues for their theoretical comprehension, methodological analysis, and practical application. The study of these phenomena holds high significance for a broad spectrum of psychological disciplines, including developmental, educational, clinical, cross-cultural psychology, personality psychology, and psychology of art. Understanding the dynamics of the transition between conscious and unconscious processes through the lens of contemplation and inner dialogue contributes importantly to solving the fundamental problem of the relationship between the conscious and the unconscious.

CRediT author statement:

Akopov G. V.: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data Curation

Akopian L. S.: Data Curation, Writing – Review & Editing

Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The authors are solely responsible for submitting the final version of the manuscript for publication. All authors contributed to the development of the article concept and to writing the manuscript. The final version of the manuscript was approved by all authors.

References

1. Akopov, G. V. (2014a). Contemplation in the categorical system of modern psychology: Theoretical and applied aspects. VEK 21 Publishing House.
2. Akopov, G. V. (2014b). Contemplation as the research subject in psychology. European Journal of Psychological Studies, 3(3), 80–84. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejps.2014.3.80
3. Akopov, G. V. (2021). Non-verbal languages of consciousness: Problem formulation and possibilities of its solution. Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1(1), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.38098/proceedings_2021_01_01_03
4. Akopov, G. V. (2021). Consciousness and mental reality: From traditional foundations to a new understanding of general psychological knowledge. Natural Systems of Mind, 1(2), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.38098/nsom_2021_01_04_02
5. Akopov, G. V. (2023). New approaches in stating and solving the problem of consciousness. National Psychological Journal,1(49), 66–76. https://doi.org/10.11621/npj.2023.0106
6. Akopov, G. V. (2023). The unity of consciousness: Variability of structural-dynamic formations. Actual Problems of Psychological Knowledge, 3(64), 9–41. https://doi.org/10.51944/20738544-2023-3-8
7. Akopov, G. V., & Akopian, L. S. (2021). Non-meditative contemplation as a research project in psychology: Between the conscious and unconscious mind. In C. Pracana & M. Wang (Eds.), Psychology applications & developments VII: Advances in psychology and psychological trends series (pp. 293–302). inScience Press.
8. Akopov, G. V., Akopian, L. S., & Belous, A. V. (2024). Internal communication of the personality: Concept, research methods, factology, theories. In N. N. Krasovskaya (Ed.), Innovative socio-psychological technologies: From theory to practice: Proceedings of the II International Scientific and Practical Festival (pp. 20–24). Belarusian State University. https://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/309623
9. Akopov, G. V., & Akopian, L. S. (2024). Commonalities and specifics in the phenomena of “contemplation”, “withdrawal into one’s thoughts”, “full awareness” and “internal communication of personality.” Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 4(2), 4–15.
10. Akopov, G. V., & Bakshutova, E. V. (Eds.). (2013). Contemplation as a contemporary theoretical and applied problem: Proceedings of the All-Russian Conference. Samara State Academy of Social Sciences and Humanities.
11. Akopov, G. V., & Belous, A. V. (2021). Inner communication of personality: Types of consciousness and awareness. Proceedings of the Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1(2), 79–85.
12. Akopov, G. V., Dergunova, V. N., & Semenova, T. V. (2022). Psychology of consciousness: Diagnostic tools. Porto-Print.
13. Alderson-Day, B., & Fernyhough, C. (2015). Inner speech: Development, cognitive functions, phenomenology, and neurobiology. Psychological Bulletin, 141(5), 931–965. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000021
14. Chalmers, D. J. (2010). The character of consciousness. Oxford University Press.
15. de Wit, H. F. (1991). Contemplative psychology (M. L. Baird, Trans.). Duquesne University Press.
16. Genaro, R. J. (2012). The consciousness paradox: Consciousness, concepts, and higher-order thoughts. MIT Press.
17. Honderich, T. (2014). Actual consciousness. Oxford University Press.
18. Lapina, A. A., & Chernyshev, B. V. (2015). The phenomenon of “mind-wandering” and its place in the continuum of consciousness. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 12(4), 13–32.
19. Lapina, A. A., Chernyshev, B. V., & Chernysheva, E. G. (2017). The impact of the mind-wandering state on the performance of an auditory condensation task: Behavioral analysis within the cognitive control paradigm. Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 14(1), 167–177.
20. Melik-Pashaev, A. A. (2024). Actualization of giftedness: Activity and contemplation. Theoretical and Experimental Psychology, 17(2), 50–61.
21. Petrenko, V. F., & Kucherenko, V. V. (2007). Meditation as immediate cognition. Methodology and History of Psychology, 2(1), 164–190.
22. Pugovkina, O. D., & Shilnikova, Z. N. (2014). The concept of mindfulness: A nonspecific factor of psychological well-being. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 3(2), 18–28.
23. Revonsuo, A. (2017). Foundations of consciousness. Routledge.
24. Shestun, E. V., & Podorovskaya, I. A. (2014). Contemplation in the theoretical understanding and practices of monotheistic religions. SamRUPS.
25. Sparby, T., & Weger, U. (Eds.). (2019). Journal of Contemplative Inquiry.
26. Terje, S. (2017). The nature of contemplative science and some prospects for its future development. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 24(5–6), 226–250.
27. Velichkovsky, B. M., Nezhdin, Y. O., Svirin, E. P., Stroganova, T. A., Fedorova, A. A., & Shishkin, S. L. (2016). Controlling the “power of thought”: On the way to new forms of human interaction with technical devices. Voprosy Psychologii, 62(1), 109–122.
28. Velmans, M. (2002). How could conscious experiences affect brains? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9(11), 3–29.
29. Volkova, E. V., Zuev, K. B., & Rusalov, V. M. (2021). Grand challenges in modern sciences. Natural Systems of Mind, 1(1), 5–14. doi: 10.38098/nsom_2021_01_03_01
30. Volkova, E., & Kalugin, A. (2021). Personality types of modern Russians: Myth or reality? Natural Systems of Mind, 1(1), 94–101. doi: 10.38098/nsom_2021_01_03_08
31. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
32. Zavershneva, E. Y., & van der Veer, R. (2019). On the experimental studies of egocentric and inner speech conducted by L. S. Vygotsky’s research group. Voprosy Psychologii, 64(6), 130–144.