☆ L2: Implementing Meditation Research and Therapies ☆ Flashcards
 Describe the types of designs that were commonly used in older meditation studies. Why are they problematic?
Observational designs were commonly used in older meditation studies. These designs are cross-sectional with 2+ groups each observed at a particular point in time
Observational designs are less effective than experimental designs and are problematic because they lack randomization and only infer correlation not causation
Control studies are an example of an observational design
Describe the ideal type of design we should use in meditation studies.
Why is this design ideal?
Why don’t we use it more often?
The ideal type of design we should use in meditation studies is the experimental design: involves randomization
Experimental designs are ideal because they provide compelling evidence of causation.
Why don’t we use it more often? Time-consuming, financially costly, logistically challenging
Differentiate between within-subject and between-subject measures
Within-subject measures: one group observed two or more times
▸ Ex: before and after weight loss treatment
Between-subject measures: 2+ groups observed, each given a different treatment
▸ Weaker because it observes 2+ people who differ in a variety of ways
Explain the time factor issue with meditation research. What are some solutions to this problem?
We need to measure practice time when studying meditation
▸ This can enable us to correlate practice time with behaviour and brain structure
There needs to be more follow-up measurements; there are not many long-term studies available on meditation
Explain the expectation issue with meditation research
Many people have existing expectations about meditation
Ex: ~50% of people believe meditation will enhance memory
If you think a treatment might work, you might be more likely to respond positively to it. If you think a treatment won’t work, you’re more likely to show no response or negative response
What are some solutions to the expectation issue with meditation research?
Sham meditations: a fake meditation which excludes nonjudgmental acceptance, the “key ingredient”
Control for expectation directly: one study measured expectation and cognition by using five meditation groups: 1 meditation group (MG), 2 expectation groups (ECG), and 1 control group
• MG+ and ECG+ (groups given a positive expectation/told that the treatment what enhance cognition) generally made more errors in the pretest
▸ Those who were told they would improve underperformed
• MG- and ECG- (groups given a negative expectation/told that the treatment would have no effect) did not respond well, showing little difference between pretest and post test
∴ Meditation does not lead to a huge improvement but an illusion of the huge improvement
People who believe meditation will help (MG+) start with worse performance but end up with mediocre performance (ex: 0 pretest to 50 post-test. People who believe meditation won’t help (MG-) do not respond meditation at all
Explain research bias. Why does it exist? How can we fight against it?
There’s a strong motivation to publish positive results in science. Many negative results do not end up being published (file drawer effect). This highly disproportionate number of positive result publications to negative result publications creates a distorted picture.
This bias exists primarily because everybody wants to be recognized for making the next big discovery. However, good researchers accommodate, not ignore, data they do not like
To fight against research bias, we can base arguments on meta-analyses instead of single studies and limit cases where the publication’s author is also the experiment’s instructor
How can we fight against research bias?
We can:
• Publish negative findings when possible
• Base arguments on meta-analysis (larger, more inclusive analysis) rather than single studies
• Limit cases where the research paper’s author is also the study’s meditation instructor
▸ This “authorship” has been associated with more positive results
How can we determine a potential mechanism of meditation’s effects?
• Using imaging studies
▸ fMRI
• Physiological measures
▸ Cortisol, adrenaline, noradrenaline
• Considering the measurement of meditation-induced changes in gene-expression
Describe how individual differences can predict the ability to meditate (be prepared to comment on many variables (personality, genetics, family environment, and other demographic features)
Personality: an enduring and characteristic pattern of thinking, feeling, and behaving
• Some personality traits (stable units of personality) can predict engagement with meditation and others can predict strength of response
• Individuals who score highly on openness to experience and neuroticism (according to the FFM) are more likely to meditate. However, it is important to note that extreme neuroticism scores are associated with attrition
Genetics: some genes are associated with a stronger response to meditation
• Ex: people with different COMT genes (an enzyme involved in regulating the levels of catecholamine transmitters) may respond differently to meditation
▸ An increase in catecholamines leads to an increase in stress. COMTs biotransform catecholamines, meaning they get rid of them; so some individuals have higher levels of COMT genetically, thus could be there less susceptible to the effects of stress and vice versa
Family environment: positive family environments are associated with a better response to meditation
What is attrition?
Why is it an issue?
What are the main factors driving attrition?
How can we predict attrition?
Attrition refers to participant dropout in a study. Attrition in meditation studies is generally high (25 to 50%)
Attrition is an issue because it may exaggerate the effects of meditation
Ex: if only nonresponders to meditation leave and only strong responders to meditation stay
The main factors driving attrition are program length—including scheduling, transportation, and time/practice requirement—and lack of interest
We can predict attrition by administering the Early Meditation Hinderance Scale (EMH) to participants early in training. The answers (which breakdown into three factors: doubt, agitation, and positivity) can predict the participant’s intention to meditate again
What is adherence/compliance?
Why is it an issue?
What are some ways we can handle adherence/compliance?
Adherence/compliance refers to the subject’s ability to follow the treatment regime.
In a meditation study, subjects are expected to meditate and perform other activities in the program correctly and on time
It is often the case that subjects stay in a study (no attrition) but have poor compliance/adherence. This is an issue if practice time is correlated with effect
To handle adherence/compliance, we can increase engagement in meditation studies or shorten meditation studies (although that may decrease effectiveness)
Possible ways to increase engagement include online/app-based meditations and biofeedback ❓
What do we mean when we say meditation is not standardized as a treatment?
Why is standardization an issue?
• Standardization refers to consistency and treatment across situations
• Unfortunately, meditation is not standardized as a treatment. This means that researchers do their own thing every time rather than agreeing on a standard approach
• This lack of standardization leaves meditation studies differing widely in length, peripheral activities, protocols, and other features
• Without standardization, it is difficult to compare studies and know which treatment is best for a participant
Describe a few negative/unpleasant effects people might experience when meditating.
How can we predict which people are likely to experience negative effects?
Some negative unpleasant effects people might experience when meditating include…
• Appetite or weight changes
• Sleep changes
• Cardiac changes
• Agitation/irritability
• Pain
Females and religious individuals are less likely to experience negative effects from meditation.
Individuals with high education and those with retreat experience and/or deconstructive meditation experience are more prone to negative responses
What is effect size and why does it matter? Describe the effect size of meditation as a treatment
Effect size refers to the quantitative magnitude of a treatment’s result
Ex: how much meditation changes pain levels
Meditation almost always has a small effect size
In relation to other treatments, MMBIs are better (higher effect size) than no treatment and active control treatments, such as relaxation. However, MMBIs are not more effective than other evidence-based treatments (EBTs) like drugs or psychotherapy
