Cited by 10Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMind wandering and attentionCognitive Functions and Memory

The Mindfulness Internal Attention (MIA) Framework: Uncovering the Attentional Mechanisms of Mindfulness Training

Open access
Hadash, Yuval, Dar, Omer, Amir, Iftach, Braver, Todd S., Bernstein, Amit·2026·Annual Review of Psychology

Published 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-psych-012925-030843

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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
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
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