The Mindfulness Internal Attention (MIA) Framework: Uncovering the Attentional Mechanisms of Mindfulness Training
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Attention is theorized to have a definitive role in mindfulness and its salutary effects. Yet, findings from more than two decades of research testing this central theoretical premise have been surprisingly mixed. To account for this paradoxical disparity between theory and findings, we propose the Mindfulness Internal Attention (MIA) framework. We theorize and review initial findings suggesting that mindfulness training primarily targets internal attention processes, which operate on internally generated or stored information and experience. Additionally, we theorize and review findings suggesting that mindfulness training affects executive functions and working memory processes shared between internal attention and late-stage external attention. In contrast, we theorize and review findings suggesting that mindfulness training does not affect early-stage external attention processes, which do not share cognitive resources with internal attention. Finally, we propose methodological innovations and outstanding questions for future research to advance our understanding of the attentional mechanisms of mindfulness training.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 128 · Cited by 10
- Authors
- Hadash, Y., Dar, O., Amir, I., Braver, T. S., & Bernstein, A.
- Affiliations
- Carnegie Mellon University (US)
- University of Haifa (IL)
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- Venue
- Annual Review of Psychology
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2026-01-20
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 255-283
- ISSN
- 0066-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2085
- OpenAlex
- W4412935798
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 128
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 2.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Annual Review of Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- mindfulness training, internal focus, external attention, executive function, working memory, attentional mechanisms, theory-practice gap, cognitive resources
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Executive Function, Mindfulness
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