CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 127Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesBehavioral Health and Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mindfulness and craving: effects and mechanisms

Tapper, Katy·2018·Clinical Psychology Review
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.11.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Mindfulness meditation has a long tradition of being used to manage cravings. This paper reviews 30 experimental studies that have examined the effects of different types of mindfulness practice on cravings for food, cigarettes and alcohol. The findings are interpreted in light of relevant theories of craving. The studies show most support for the elaborated intrusion theory of desire and conditioning models. They suggest that whilst mindfulness strategies may bring about immediate reductions in craving, such effects are likely to stem from working memory load, and will not necessarily be superior to alternative strategies that also load working memory. Likewise, reductions in craving over the medium term may occur due to extinction processes that result from the individual inhibiting craving-related responses. Again, alternative strategies that promote response suppression may be equally effective. Nevertheless, a smaller number of studies show promising results where mindfulness exercises have been repeatedly practiced over a longer period of time. The results of these studies provide tentative support for Buddhist models of craving that suggest mindfulness practice may confer unique benefits in terms of both craving reduction and reducing the extent to which craving leads to consumption. Further research would be needed to confirm this.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.11.003

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 82 references

1 of the 82 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–127 of 127

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Tapper, K.
Affiliations
University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Tapper, Katy
ORCID
Tapper, Katy
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-02
Volume
59
Pages
101-117
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cpr.2017.11.003
OpenAlex
W2768389452
Cited by
127
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7
FWCI
1.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
mindfulness meditation, craving, food cravings, cigarette craving, alcohol craving, working memory load, extinction, response suppression, craving reduction
MeSH terms
Cigarette Smoking, Alcohol Drinking, Food, Humans, Behavior, Addictive, Mindfulness, Craving

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