Skip to content

A Unifying Framework of Meditation Techniques

Vladimír Imriška

Mindfulness February 1, 2026 DOI: 10.1007/s12671-026-02758-1 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Systematic review and qualitative study Preregistered Peer reviewed
Sample size 113
Population Adult meditators (Study 1) and relevant articles from PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science (Study 2)
Topics Meditation
Keywords Typology Contemplation Happiness Narrative Bridging networking Systematic review Multidisciplinary approach Applied psychology Meaning existential Qualitative research Taxonomy biology Clarity Variety cybernetics Consistency knowledge bases Cognitive psychology
Key findings A taxonomy of meditation techniques was developed, consisting of five typology clusters, two classes, and three variants.

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Meditation techniques have attracted increasing interdisciplinary attention. However, no comprehensive, robust classification system has integrated practices across diverse traditions. This study addresses this gap by developing a unifying framework for categorizing meditation techniques.

Methods: Two complementary studies were conducted. In Study 1, qualitative responses from 113 adult meditators regarding their meditation practices were analyzed using framework analysis and narrative review, yielding a preliminary taxonomy. In Study 2, the classification was expanded and refined through a systematic literature review conducted under the PRISMA guidelines, resulting in 113 relevant articles from the PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, and these were subsequently narratively reviewed.

Results: A novel, unifying framework was developed based on the object of meditation technique and a multi-dimensional approach to personhood. The taxonomy comprises five typology clusters (physical, emotional, psychological, spiritual, and mixed), two classes (based on happiness or meaning orientation), and three variants (kataphatic vs. apophatic, formal vs. informal, and guided vs. unguided).

Conclusions: The proposed framework presents a systematic and integrative approach to classifying meditation techniques across diverse contemplative traditions. It provides a more precise structure for understanding the relationships between different practices, thus establishing a foundation for investigating the underlying mechanisms. This framework may also enhance the rigor of measurement in mindfulness research by offering a more refined categorization. Furthermore, it has practical implications for practitioners, enabling them to select techniques tailored to their specific goals, thereby bridging the gap between theoretical research and practical application. Preregistration This study was not preregistered.

Comparable studies

Other systematic reviews and meta-analyses on meditation, most cited first.

Study Year Design Participants
Meditation Programs for Psychological Stress and Well-being Diverse adult clinical populations 2014 Meta-analysis n = 3,515
Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction for Stress Management in Healthy People: A Review and Meta-Analysis Healthy subjects 2009 Systematic review and meta-analysis
The psychological effects of meditation: A meta-analysis. Nonclinical groups of adult meditators 2012 Meta-analysis n = 163
Efficacy of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy in Prevention of Depressive Relapse Adults with recurrent depression in full or partial remission 2016 Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized controlled trials n = 1,258
Mindfulness‐Based Stress Reduction and Mindfulness‐Based Cognitive Therapy – a systematic review of randomized controlled trials 2011 Systematic review

Citations in the library

Explore topics