Mindfulness meditation has become widely used in therapy, corporate wellness, education, and the military, but the research backing it has faced criticism for poor methodology and misinformation. This article reviews the current state of mindfulness research, discussing difficulties in defining mindfulness, the proper scope of studies, and key methodological issues. The authors summarize what is known and unknown, offering a prescriptive agenda for contemplative science that focuses on assessment, training, possible adverse effects, and brain imaging. The goal is to inform scientists, media, and the public, minimize harm, curb poor research practices, and stop the spread of misinformation about mindfulness's benefits, costs, and future.
The authors reply to a commentary by Davidson and Dahl, agreeing with many suggestions but emphasizing that their original concerns remain especially relevant to mindfulness and meditation research. They highlight the vulnerability of this relatively young field compared to more mature scientific disciplines, discuss special characteristics of research participants, and stress the serious consequences of adverse experiences that a significant subset of individuals suffer during mindfulness and other contemplative practices. They also scrutinize common applications of mindfulness and meditation to illness and introduce caveats regarding mobile technologies for guiding contemplative practices.