Skip to content

Questionable prospective associations between mindfulness and mental health problems: A simulated multiverse reanalysis and comment on.

Kimmo Sorjonen, Bo Melin, Marika Melin

Journal of Affective Disorders February 24, 2026 DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2026.121508 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Commentary Peer reviewed
Topics Meditation
Keywords Humans Prospective studies Mental disorders Mental health problems Spurious correlations Multiverse analyses Analytic rigor
Key points Argues that Ma et al.'s conclusion of prospective effects between mindfulness and mental health problems is not robust: across alternative model specifications, cross-lagged effects were discrepant (increasing, decreasing, or null), and meta-analytic aggregation of these effects did not differ significantly from zero. The authors contend that correlations in CLPN models do not prove causality and recommend fitting and juxtaposing alternative models for greater analytic rigor.

Abstract

Based on findings in cross-lagged panel network (CLPN) models, Ma et al. concluded prospective effects between indicators of mindfulness and mental health problems. Here, we used multiverse methodology and found discrepant increasing, decreasing, and null effects depending on the used model, and meta-analytic aggregations of these discrepant effects did not differ significantly from zero. Hence, the conclusions by Ma et al. can be challenged. It is important for researchers to bear in mind that correlations, including cross-lagged effects in CLPN models, do not prove causality in order not to overinterpret findings, something that may have happened to Ma et al. For increased analytic rigor, we recommend researchers to fit, as we did here, alternative models to data and to juxtapose findings.

Citations in the library

Explore topics