Meditation and the Brain: What a 105-Study Review Found

If your attention feels frayed, a short daily attention practice is a cheap two-week experiment. A new systematic review mapped which brain areas are active during these practices. It did not test whether any practice improves attention in daily life. Across 105 studies of meditation, prayer, chanting and similar practices, researchers found recurring activity in the brain’s attention, emotion-regulation and self-focus circuits. The studies are mostly small and done in healthy volunteers, so treat this as grounds for an experiment, not a guarantee.

What the review covered

The authors searched Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE and ProQuest through June 2026 for studies that measured brain activity or structure, using tools such as EEG and MRI, in people doing religious, spiritual or contemplative practices. They included 105 studies published between 1998 and 2026. The traditions included Buddhist, Christian, Islamic and Hindu practices, among others, and the practices ranged from meditation and prayer to chanting and ritual. The studies were too different from one another to pool into a single statistic, so the authors summarized them in words.^[1]

The typical study was small: the median sample was about 23 people, and the largest had 211. About half used EEG, which records the brain’s electrical activity, and about 4 in 10 used fMRI.^[1]

What it found

The same set of brain areas kept showing up: the prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate (both tied to voluntary attention), the insula, amygdala, hippocampus and the default mode network. That network is the set of brain regions active during mind-wandering and self-referential thought, and it is typically quieter during focused tasks.^[1] Each practice had its own pattern:

• Meditation (35 studies). The recurring findings were quieter default mode network activity and more efficient engagement of the frontal lobes, plus different brain-rhythm patterns for different meditation styles.^[1]
• Prayer. It engaged networks involved in social thinking, the ones used when thinking about other people.
• Chanting and recitation. These often showed lower activity in emotion-processing (limbic) regions, along with shifts in brain-wave rhythms, though results were mixed across traditions.
• Mystical and altered states. These showed the most widely spread activity across the brain.

Studies of long-term practitioners also reported structural differences in the brain, an idea known as neuroplasticity. Some of those comparisons look at practitioners versus non-practitioners at a single point in time, which can’t show that the practice caused the difference.^[1]

What this review can’t tell you

• Small, varied studies. With a median of about 23 participants and a wide mix of methods, the authors say their conclusions identify recurring patterns, not pooled effect sizes.^[1]
• Brain activity is not daily-life focus. The included studies measured brain imaging or electrical activity. The review doesn’t show that any practice improves concentration at work or in the rest of your day.
• Mostly healthy people. Most of the 105 studies looked at healthy participants, and the authors state that the review doesn’t establish that these practices treat diagnosed mental health conditions.^[1]
• No formal quality score. Because designs varied so much, the authors judged study limitations in words rather than with a single risk-of-bias tool, and they searched only English-language, peer-reviewed papers.^[1]
• Meaning may matter. One study in the review found that reciting the Quran activated empathy and memory regions more in Muslim than in non-Muslim participants, which suggests the meaning of a practice, not only its mechanics, shapes the brain’s response. The authors call for testing practices in their own cultural settings rather than only as secularized versions, so results from a devotional practice may not carry over to a secular one.^[1]

What to do with this

The review doesn’t recommend a dose or a technique. It does include studies that compare distinct styles, including focused attention and open monitoring.^[1] What follows is our suggestion for a low-cost experiment, not a protocol from the study.

• Pick one style: focused attention. Sit for 10 minutes at the same time each day. Choose a single anchor, such as the feeling of your breath at your nostrils. When your mind wanders, notice that it did and come back. The noticing and returning is the rep.
• Give it a slot you already own. Right after you wake is a natural one, and our post on the analog first hour makes the case for protecting that time.
• Measure it for two weeks. At the same time each afternoon, rate from 1 to 5 how scattered you feel. Do it for a week before you start and for two weeks of practice. Keep the practice if the numbers improve and it fits your life. Drop it if they don’t.
• Know what you’re training. The skill is holding attention on one thing and returning when it slips. Our post on the real attention span problem explains why depth, not length, is the part worth building.
• Stop if it backfires. If sitting quietly stirs up anxiety or painful memories, stop and talk with a clinician or therapist about what to try instead.

Whether you meditate, pray or do neither, these practices share a deliberate focus of attention: pick a target, notice the drift, return. Whether training it pays off in your day is the question this review leaves open.

References

[1] Husain W, Ammar A, Wusqa UT, Farooq M, Tariq Z, Pandi-Perumal SR, BaHammam AS, Trabelsi K, Griffiths MD, Pakpour A, Jahrami H. The Neuroscience of Religious and Spiritual Practices: A Systematic Review of Neurotheological Evidence. Brain Behav, 2026;16(9):e71733. Population: 105 studies (1998-2026) using neuroimaging or neurophysiological measures in people engaged in religious, spiritual or contemplative practices; PRISMA 2020, registered on the Open Science Framework; Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE and ProQuest searched to June 30, 2026; narrative synthesis (SWiM). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.71733. Finding as used: median sample size about 23 (range 1-211); EEG 49.5% and fMRI 39.0% of studies; consistent engagement of prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate, default mode network, insula, amygdala, hippocampus, temporoparietal junction and dopaminergic/serotonergic systems; practice-specific signatures (meditation: default mode network suppression and prefrontal augmentation, 35 studies; prayer: social-cognition networks; chanting/recitation: limbic deactivation with mixed results across traditions; mystical states: most distributed profiles); long-term practitioners showed structural differences, with some cross-sectional comparisons unable to support causal inference; conclusions identify convergent patterns rather than pooled effect estimates; most studies examined healthy participants and the review does not establish that spiritual practices treat diagnosed mental health conditions; limitations narratively assessed rather than with a single risk-of-bias tool, English-language peer-reviewed studies only; one included study found Quranic recitation activated empathy and memory regions more in Muslim than non-Muslim participants; authors recommend testing devotional practices in their own cultural contexts rather than as secularized protocols; included studies compared focused attention, open monitoring and loving-kindness meditation. ↑︎

Kurt Greiner

Kurt is a digital strategist and IT professional blending emerging technology with practical application to help businesses and individuals streamline their digital presence. His current work focuses on the intersection of intentional living and technological resilience, exploring how individuals can leverage modern tools to navigate the second half of life with purpose.