| Title |
The limited prosocial effects of meditation: A systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41598-018-20299-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ute Kreplin, Miguel Farias, Inti A. Brazil |
| Abstract |
Many individuals believe that meditation has the capacity to not only alleviate mental-illness but to improve prosociality. This article systematically reviewed and meta-analysed the effects of meditation interventions on prosociality in randomized controlled trials of healthy adults. Five types of social behaviours were identified: compassion, empathy, aggression, connectedness and prejudice. Although we found a moderate increase in prosociality following meditation, further analysis indicated that this effect was qualified by two factors: type of prosociality and methodological quality. Meditation interventions had an effect on compassion and empathy, but not on aggression, connectedness or prejudice. We further found that compassion levels only increased under two conditions: when the teacher in the meditation intervention was a co-author in the published study; and when the study employed a passive (waiting list) control group but not an active one. Contrary to popular beliefs that meditation will lead to prosocial changes, the results of this meta-analysis showed that the effects of meditation on prosociality were qualified by the type of prosociality and methodological quality of the study. We conclude by highlighting a number of biases and theoretical problems that need addressing to improve quality of research in this area. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 426 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 51 | 12% |
| United Kingdom | 45 | 11% |
| Spain | 43 | 10% |
| Canada | 12 | 3% |
| Australia | 11 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 9 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 9 | 2% |
| Japan | 9 | 2% |
| France | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 63 | 15% |
| Unknown | 167 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 306 | 72% |
| Scientists | 80 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 29 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 10 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 410 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 410 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 73 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 53 | 13% |
| Researcher | 37 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 34 | 8% |
| Other | 85 | 21% |
| Unknown | 93 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 145 | 35% |
| Neuroscience | 29 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 5% |
| Other | 54 | 13% |
| Unknown | 118 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 674. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#30,192
of 24,871,735 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#469
of 136,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#703
of 448,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#15
of 3,863 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,871,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 136,194 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,006 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,863 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.