Does meditation expand hte size of some areas of the brain?
That's the finding from a group of researchers at UCLA who used high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to scan the brains of people who meditate. In a study published in the journal NeuroImage and currently available online (by subscription), the researchers report that certain regions in the brains of long-term meditators were larger than in a similar control group.
Specifically, meditators showed significantly larger volumes of the hippocampus and areas within the orbito-frontal cortex, the thalamus and the inferior temporal gyrus — all regions known for regulating emotions.
"We know that people who consistently meditate have a singular ability to cultivate positive emotions, retain emotional stability and engage in mindful behavior," said Eileen Luders, lead author and a postdoctoral research fellow at the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging. "The observed differences in brain anatomy might give us a clue why meditators have these exceptional abilities."
Research has confirmed the beneficial aspects of meditation. In addition to having better focus and control over their emotions, many people who meditate regularly have reduced levels of stress and bolstered immune systems. But less is known about the link between meditation and brain structure.
Maybe meditation causes changes in the brain that account for this result. But since this was not a longitudinal study we do not know whether the meditators simply had more gray matter to start with.
Because this was not a longitudinal study — which would have tracked meditators from the time they began meditating onward — it's possible that the meditators already had more regional gray matter and volume in specific areas; that may have attracted them to meditation in the first place, Luders said.
Longitudinal study needed.
| Share | | Randall Parker, 2009 May 12 10:50 PM Brain Performance |
This study is a classical example of misinterpreting the data.
The results simply say that "CERTAIN regions of the brains of long-term meditators were larger". What people actually read is that "meditation boosts ALL gray matter" and some even conclude that meditation can make them smarter.
It is logical that when people practice an activity every day they will develop new neuronal links (dendrites) which will increase the size of their gray matter BUT only in the regions that are involved in that specific process. There are many studies showing results similar to the current research (I did not have the links but I believe they can be found easily on the Internet). E.g. London taxi drivers have a part of the brain (which deals with special orientation) enlarged; musicians have another part of the brain (that deals presumably with the representation of audio signals) enlarged; regular exercise has been shown to create new dendrites (regardless of age) in another specific part of the brain; etc.
Just like in the meditation study, in two of these examples the researchers concluded that a specific activity can increase grey matter. Thus misleading readers into thinking that they can become smarter by running, playing music or medidating.
I don't question the benefits of meditation. It has been proven that it decreases stress which can cause many illnesses. If somebody wants to become calmer then meditation is the solution. However they should not expect to become smarter by doing this.
People have to be more careful when they interpret the results of studies. A bad conclusion can put them on the wrong path. This way they loose precious time pursuing something that simply cannot fulfill their goals.
PS
You have an excellent blog Randall! I have found numerous excellent articles here. I hope this dedication will stay with you in the future.
I just now spent 15 minutes writing a response to the above article and comment. I make an error on identifying the letters on the captcha, and when I returned to the page, the comment was gone. Given that people may often make errors with regard to the captcha, it ought to be possible to preserve their posts when they do. Actually, most sites do just that.
The post that was lost essentially made the point that, contrary to C's concern about data misinterpretation, the article went to some lengths to ensure readers understood the limitations of the data presented.