| Well-being and cognitive ability are valued, vital human attributes. Whether and how individuals can increase either remains largely unknown. Proponents of meditation, however, claim that it increases both. Through meta-analysis and quasi-experimentation, I investigated this claim. As reported in Paper 1, I meta-analyzed half a century of research into the cognitive effects of meditation. Results revealed a large, positive effect that, I argue, is best explained by researchers' collective bias. As reported in Paper 2, I used implicit and explicit measures to evaluate the claim that meditation promotes well-being. On measures related to life satisfaction and affective experience, meditators showed greater signs of well-being than demographically-matched nonmeditators. I argue that these findings reflect a causal effect of meditation on well-being. Finally, as reported in Paper 3, I used novel measures of attentional rubbernecking, emotional-cognitive control, and mental control to investigate the claim that meditation trains attention. Meditators outperformed nonmeditators on the attentional rubbernecking tasks, nonmeditators outperformed meditators on the emotional-cognitive control task, and the groups did not differ on the mental control task. I argue that these results reflect either a causal effect of meditation on the strategic use of sustained attention, or a causal effect of meditation on attentional scope. Taken together, these findings suggest that meditation does not improve cognitive ability, promotes well-being, and may alter attentional strategies or styles. |
