CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 766Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual perception and processing mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mental Training Affects Distribution of Limited Brain Resources

Open access
Slagter, Heleen A, Lutz, Antoine, Greischar, Lawrence L, Francis, Andrew D, Nieuwenhuis, Sander, Davis, James M, Davidson, Richard J·2007·PLoS Biology
DOI 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050138PMC PMC1865565
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The information processing capacity of the human mind is limited, as is evidenced by the so-called "attentional-blink" deficit: When two targets (T1 and T2) embedded in a rapid stream of events are presented in close temporal proximity, the second target is often not seen. This deficit is believed to result from competition between the two targets for limited attentional resources. Here we show, using performance in an attentional-blink task and scalp-recorded brain potentials, that meditation, or mental training, affects the distribution of limited brain resources. Three months of intensive mental training resulted in a smaller attentional blink and reduced brain-resource allocation to the first target, as reflected by a smaller T1-elicited P3b, a brain-potential index of resource allocation. Furthermore, those individuals that showed the largest decrease in brain-resource allocation to T1 generally showed the greatest reduction in attentional-blink size. These observations provide novel support for the view that the ability to accurately identify T2 depends upon the efficient deployment of resources to T1. The results also demonstrate that mental training can result in increased control over the distribution of limited brain resources. Our study supports the idea that plasticity in brain and mental function exists throughout life and illustrates the usefulness of systematic mental training in the study of the human mind.

Overview

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 · 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050138

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Attentional-Blink Task On every trial, between 15 and 19 items were presented at the center of the screen, preceded by a 1,780-ms fixation cross. Most of the items were letters, presented for 50 ms each and followed by a 34-ms blank. On T2-present trials, there were two target numbers (T1 and T2) among the items, which participants had to detect and report at the end of the trial. The temporal distance between T1 and T2 could be short (336 ms) or long (672 ms).
Figure 1 Attentional-Blink Task On every trial, between 15 and 19 items were presented at the center of the screen, preceded by a 1,780-ms fixation cross. Most of the items were letters, presented for 50 ms each and followed by a 34-ms blank. On T2-present trials, there were two target numbers (T1 and T2) among the items, which participants had to detect and report at the end of the trial. The temporal distance between T1 and T2 could be short (336 ms) or long (672 ms).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Effects of Intensive Mental Training on the Attentional Blink (A) T2 accuracy at time 1 (black bars) and the improvement (red bars) or deterioration (blue bars) in T2 accuracy at time 2, for each participant, separately for the short and long T1–T2 interval. (B) Average T2 accuracy (plus standard error) for each session, T1–T2 interval, and group (at-chance participants excluded). Note that both groups showed an attentional blink at time 1: lower T2 accuracy at short- compared to long-interval trials. Note further that, as predicted, the practitioner group (Pract) showed a significantly larger reduction in attentional-blink size over time than the novice group (Nov).
Figure 2 Effects of Intensive Mental Training on the Attentional Blink (A) T2 accuracy at time 1 (black bars) and the improvement (red bars) or deterioration (blue bars) in T2 accuracy at time 2, for each participant, separately for the short and long T1–T2 interval. (B) Average T2 accuracy (plus standard error) for each session, T1–T2 interval, and group (at-chance participants excluded). Note that both groups showed an attentional blink at time 1: lower T2 accuracy at short- compared to long-interval trials. Note further that, as predicted, the practitioner group (Pract) showed a significantly larger reduction in attentional-blink size over time than the novice group (Nov).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Effects of Intensive Mental Training on Brain-Resource Allocation to T1 (A) Brain potentials from electrode Pz, time-locked to T1 onset on short-interval trials as a function of T2 accuracy (no-blink vs. blink), session, and group. These data show that, as hypothesized, the practitioners showed a significantly greater reduction in T1-elicited P3b amplitude than the novices in no-blink versus blink trials at time 2 versus time 1. The scalp map shows electrode sites where this three-way interaction was significant between 420 and 440 ms. (B) Brain potentials from electrode Pz, time-locked to T1 onset on short-interval trials as a function of session, T2 accuracy, and group. This figure panel illustrates that intensive mental training was associated with a selective reduction in T1-elicited P3b amplitude in no-blink trials in the practitioner group.
Figure 3 Effects of Intensive Mental Training on Brain-Resource Allocation to T1 (A) Brain potentials from electrode Pz, time-locked to T1 onset on short-interval trials as a function of T2 accuracy (no-blink vs. blink), session, and group. These data show that, as hypothesized, the practitioners showed a significantly greater reduction in T1-elicited P3b amplitude than the novices in no-blink versus blink trials at time 2 versus time 1. The scalp map shows electrode sites where this three-way interaction was significant between 420 and 440 ms. (B) Brain potentials from electrode Pz, time-locked to T1 onset on short-interval trials as a function of session, T2 accuracy, and group. This figure panel illustrates that intensive mental training was associated with a selective reduction in T1-elicited P3b amplitude in no-blink trials in the practitioner group.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 The Ability to Accurately Identify T2 Depends upon the Efficient Processing of T1 Relationship between the change in attentional-blink magnitude over time and the corresponding change in T1-elicited P3b amplitude (for no-blink trials). Note that those individuals that showed the largest decrease in T1-elicited P3b amplitude over time generally showed the largest increase in T2 accuracy over time.
Figure 4 The Ability to Accurately Identify T2 Depends upon the Efficient Processing of T1 Relationship between the change in attentional-blink magnitude over time and the corresponding change in T1-elicited P3b amplitude (for no-blink trials). Note that those individuals that showed the largest decrease in T1-elicited P3b amplitude over time generally showed the largest increase in T2 accuracy over time.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Mental Training Selectively Reduced Early T1-Evoked P3b Amplitude (A–C) Brain potentials from electrode Pz, time-locked to T1 onset as a function of Session (time 1 or time 2) and Group (novices or practitioners), shown separately for (A) short-interval T2-present no-blink trials, (B) long-interval T2-present no-blink trials, and (C) short-interval T2-absent trials. Yellow bars indicate the time windows in which the reduction in brain potential over time was significant in the time window of the T1-elicited P3b (p < 0.05). (D) The T1-locked change in brain potentials over time in practitioners from electrode Pz, shown separately for short-interval T2-present no-blink trials, long-interval T2-present no-blink trials, and short-interval T2 absent trials. The scalp maps show electrode sites where the change in T1-evoked P3b over time was significant between 380 and 400 ms, separately for each trial type. These data confirm that intensive mental training was associated with a selective reduction in T1-evoked P3b amplitude around 400 ms.
Figure 5 Mental Training Selectively Reduced Early T1-Evoked P3b Amplitude (A–C) Brain potentials from electrode Pz, time-locked to T1 onset as a function of Session (time 1 or time 2) and Group (novices or practitioners), shown separately for (A) short-interval T2-present no-blink trials, (B) long-interval T2-present no-blink trials, and (C) short-interval T2-absent trials. Yellow bars indicate the time windows in which the reduction in brain potential over time was significant in the time window of the T1-elicited P3b (p < 0.05). (D) The T1-locked change in brain potentials over time in practitioners from electrode Pz, shown separately for short-interval T2-present no-blink trials, long-interval T2-present no-blink trials, and short-interval T2 absent trials. The scalp maps show electrode sites where the change in T1-evoked P3b over time was significant between 380 and 400 ms, separately for each trial type. These data confirm that intensive mental training was associated with a selective reduction in T1-evoked P3b amplitude around 400 ms.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Marois, 2005, Trends Cogn Sci, 9, 296
  2. Raymond, 1992, J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 18, 849
  3. Ward, 1996, Cogn Psychol, 30, 79
  4. Shapiro, 1997, Trends Cogn Sci, 1, 291
  5. Martens, 2006, J Cogn Neurosci, 18, 1423
  6. Carter, 2005, Curr Biol, 15, R412
  7. Lutz, 2004, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101, 16369
  8. Maguire, 2000, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 97, 4398
  9. Munte, 2002, Nat Rev Neurosci, 6, 473
  10. Green, 2003, Nature, 423, 534
  11. Wickens, 1983, Science, 221, 1080
  12. Fahle, 2005, Curr Opin Neurobiol, 15, 154
  13. Shapiro, 2006, Neuroreport, 17, 163
  14. Vogel, 2002, Psych Bull Rev, 9, 739
  15. Vogel, 1998, J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 24, 1656
  16. Sergent, 2005, Nat Neurosci, 8, 1391
  17. Olivers, 2005, Psych Sci, 16, 265
  18. Chun, 1995, J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 21, 109
  19. Duncan, 1994, Nature, 369, 313
  20. Shapiro, 1994, J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 20, 357
  21. Martens, 2007, Acta Psychol (Amst), 123, 204
  22. Bledowski, 2004, J Neurosci, 24, 9353
  23. Hommel, 2005, Psych Res, 70, 425
  24. Sergent, 2004, Psych Sci, 15, 720
  25. Delorme, 2004, J Neurosci Methods, 134, 9
  26. Jung, 2000, Psychophysiology, 37, 163

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 766

Related

Metadata

Authors
Slagter, H. A., Lutz, A., Greischar, L. L., Francis, A. D., Nieuwenhuis, S., Davis, J. M., & Davidson, R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Leiden University (NL)
Corresponding author
Davidson, Richard J
ORCID
Venue
PLoS Biology
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2007-05-08
Volume
5
Issue
6
Pages
e138
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
DOI
10.1371/journal.pbio.0050138
PMC
PMC1865565
OpenAlex
W1987937684
Cited by
757
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 57 · 2014: 58 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 43
FWCI
40.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Mind and Life Institute
  • National Institutes of Health (5u01at002114-03)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50-MH069315-03, P50MH069315, MH069315)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (K23DA022471)
  • National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (U01AT002114-01A1)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (U01-AT002114, U01AT002114-01A1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
attentional blink, mental training, meditation, P3b, event-related potentials, attentional competition, cognitive plasticity, information processing capacity
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Case-Control Studies, Meditation, Attentional Blink

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