ArticleMindfulness2026
Distinguishing the Attentional Mechanisms of Distinct Mindfulness States: A Computational Modeling Comparison of Focused Attention and Open Monitoring.
Article in Mindfulness, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Focused attention (FA) and open monitoring (OM) meditation are theorized to confer distinct neurobehavioral influences, yet the specific cognitive mechanisms underlying these effects remain poorly understood. This study leveraged computational modeling to formally test and distinguish how these two mindfulness states modulate theoretical processes of attention control. Method: We analyzed flanker task data from a prior study in which 29 meditation-naïve participants completed a fully within-subject crossover protocol, involving brief state inductions of FA, OM, and active control. We then fit a shrinking spotlight (SSP) computational model to quantify parameters of attentional scope, decision thresholds, and nondecision-related processing. Results: As hypothesized, FA decreased the maximum "width" of the attentional spotlight compared to OM and control conditions (all Conclusions: These results indicate that FA narrows attentional scope, possibly reducing initial distraction but with limitations to rapidly recalibrate attention beyond the initial scope of focus. In contrast, OM appears to improve the speed of selecting relevant targets, while slowing perceptual-motor encoding and motor execution. Together, these findings provide model-based evidence for the distinct attentional mechanisms of FA and OM and illustrate the utility of computational cognitive modeling for testing key theories within mindfulness science. Preregistration: This study was not preregistered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.