Cited by 71Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMind wandering and attentionPain Management and Placebo Effect

Brain activity in mindfulness depends on experience: a meta-analysis of fMRI studies

Falcone, Gina, Jerram, Matthew·2018·Mindfulness

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12671-018-0884-5

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Falcone, G., & Jerram, M.
Affiliations
Suffolk University (US)
Corresponding author
Jerram, Matthew
Venue
Mindfulness
Published
2018-02-02
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
1319-1329
ISSN
  • 1868-8527 (ISSN-L)
  • 1868-8535
OpenAlex
W2786760444
Cited by
71
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2
FWCI
0.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Mindfulness (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
Keywords
mindfulness meditation, neural correlates of meditation, experienced meditators, novice meditators, brain activity, insula, anterior cingulate cortex, frontal cortex, globus pallidus, medial frontal gyrus, skill acquisition

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