This preregistered quasi-experimental study compared metacognitive monitoring accuracy—using a visuo-spatial working memory task with confidence judgments—between 61 young mindfulness meditation practitioners (aged 18–30, ≥3 years practice, ≥3 sessions/week) and 63 non-practitioners, alongside self-reported mindfulness (MAAS) and meditation depth (MEDEQ).
Both groups showed significant overall monitoring accuracy (γ̄ = 0.52, p < 0.001), but there was **no group difference** in any metacognitive measure. The only significant difference was on the MAAS, with practitioners scoring higher in self-reported mindfulness (t = −3.14, p = 0.002). Within practitioners, neither meditation depth, years of practice, session frequency, nor MAAS scores correlated with monitoring accuracy.
- Quasi-experimental design with self-selected groups; unmeasured confounders (personality, motivation, baseline cognition) cannot be excluded. - Confidence judgments were prompted, not spontaneous, and targeted working memory specifically—mindfulness may train monitoring in other domains (e.g., interoception, attention) or via more implicit processes. - Mindfulness was measured only with the MAAS, a brief single-factor scale; a multidimensional tool (e.g., FFMQ) might reveal facet-specific associations.
Clinicians using mindfulness-based programs should not assume these practices sharpen objective metacognitive monitoring of memory performance in young adults. Self-reported gains in mindfulness do not appear to translate to measurable improvements in laboratory-based monitoring accuracy.
Explore related topics
