↓ Skip to main content

The limited prosocial effects of meditation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
40 news outlets
blogs
11 blogs
twitter
445 tweeters
facebook
11 Facebook pages
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
3 Redditors
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
340 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 445 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 340 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 340 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 18%
Student > Master 47 14%
Student > Bachelor 33 10%
Other 32 9%
Researcher 31 9%
Other 79 23%
Unknown 57 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 126 37%
Neuroscience 27 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 6%
Social Sciences 18 5%
Other 47 14%
Unknown 80 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 680. 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 10 January 2022.
All research outputs
#19,952
of 20,024,383 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#322
of 106,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#593
of 390,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,024,383 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 106,408 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.3. 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 390,937 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 14 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.