Mindfulness and Metacognitive Monitoring Accuracy in Young Meditation Practitioners Compared to Non-Practitioners

Metacognition, the ability to monitor one's own cognitive processes, is proposed as a mechanism underlying mindfulness, but few studies have tested this objectively. In a sample of 124 participants (61 experienced mindfulness meditators and 63 non-practitioners), monitoring accuracy was assessed using a visuo-spatial working memory task with confidence judgments. While participants overall showed significant monitoring accuracy, no differences emerged between meditators and non-practitioners. Meditators reported higher trait mindfulness on the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, but within this group, no features of meditation practice correlated with monitoring accuracy. The authors suggest the null findings may relate to the specific type of monitoring assessed and discuss conceptual differences between meta-awareness in contemplative traditions and metacognition.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Theoretical models propose metacognition to be one of the underlying cognitive mechanisms of mindfulness. However, only few studies have examined metacognition objectively with laboratory tasks in relation to mindfulness. Here, we investigated whether the metacognitive process of monitoring and its accuracy are associated with mindfulness-based meditation practice. Method In total, n = 124 participants (including n = 61 young mindfulness meditation practitioners with at least 3 years of meditation practice engaging in ≥ 3 sessions per week, and n = 63 non-practitioners) completed an adapted metacognitive visuo-spatial working memory task and provided monitoring judgments after each trial (confidence judgments [CJ] regarding their recall performance). Monitoring accuracy was operationalized as the relationship between CJ and objective performance. All participants completed the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) and practitioners the Meditation Depth Questionnaire (MEDEQ) as well as open questions regarding their meditation practice. Results Overall monitoring accuracy was significant ( $$\overline{\gamma }$$ γ ¯ = 0.52, p < 0.001), indicating that participants were sensitive to variations in their memory performance. However, no group differences between practitioners and non-practitioners were found, except for the MAAS ( t = − 3.14, p = 0.002), reflecting that practitioners reported higher levels of mindfulness. Within the group of practitioners, no features of meditation practice, nor MEDEQ or MAAS scores were significantly correlated with monitoring accuracy. Conclusions We discuss the object of monitoring, and the level of consciousness assessed in the present metacognition task as possible reasons for null findings as well as various conceptualizations of meta-awareness within contemplative traditions and its overlap with different facets of metacognition as avenues for future research. Preregistration The study was preregistered and the preregistration can be accessed at https://osf.io/k8hcv/ . Regula Neuenschwander and Donna Bryce share first authorship.