↓ Skip to main content

The cumulative effects of Transcendental Meditation on cognitive function — a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Medica Austriaca, November 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
wikipedia
12 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
Title
The cumulative effects of Transcendental Meditation on cognitive function — a systematic review of randomised controlled trials
Published in
Acta Medica Austriaca, November 2003
DOI 10.1007/bf03040500
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter H. Canter, Edzard Ernst

Abstract

It is claimed that regular practice of Transcendental Meditation (TM) improves cognitive function and increases intelligence. This systematic review assesses the evidence from randomised controlled trials for cumulative effects of TM on cognitive function. Searches were made of electronic databases and the collected papers and official websites of the TM organisation. Only randomised controlled trials with objective outcome measures of the cumulative effects of TM on cognitive function were included. Trials that measured only acute effects of TM, or used only neurophysiological outcome measures were excluded. 107 articles reporting the effects of TM on cognitive function were identified and 10 met the inclusion criteria. Most were excluded because they used no controls or did not randomize subjects between interventions. Of the 10 trials included, 4 reported large positive effects of TM on cognitive function, four were completely negative, and 2 were largely negative in outcome. All 4 positive trials recruited subjects from among people favourably predisposed towards TM, and used passive control procedures. The other 6 trials recruited subjects with no specific interest in TM, and 5 of them used structured control procedures. The association observed between positive outcome, subject selection procedure and control procedure suggests that the large positive effects reported in 4 trials result from an expectation effect. The claim that TM has a specific and cumulative effect on cognitive function is not supported by the evidence from randomised controlled trials.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 92 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 19%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 10%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 19%
Neuroscience 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 15 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 16 March 2022.
All research outputs
#3,414,665
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Acta Medica Austriaca
#99
of 967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,271
of 57,107 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Medica Austriaca
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 57,107 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them