Cited by 74Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceIndian and Buddhist Studies

Meditation – Neuroscientific Approaches and Philosophical Implications

Stefan Schmidt, Harald Walach·2014·Studies in Neuroscience, Consciousness and Spirituality

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-319-01634-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schmidt, S., & Walach, H.
Venue
Studies in Neuroscience, Consciousness and Spirituality
Published
2014
ISSN
  • 2211-8918 (ISSN-L)
  • 2211-8926
OpenAlex
W86687759
Cited by
74
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4
FWCI
2.79
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Studies in neuroscience, consciousness and spirituality (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Indian and Buddhist Studies
Keywords
meditation, consciousness, neuroscience of meditation, philosophy of mind, religious studies, spirituality, mind-brain relationship

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review