A pilot study investigating changes in neural processing after mindfulness training in elite athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to pay close attention to the present moment can be a crucial factor for performing well in a competitive situation. Training mindfulness is one approach to potentially improve elite athletes' ability to focus their attention on the present moment. However, virtually nothing is known about whether these types of interventions alter neural systems that are important for optimal performance. This pilot study examined whether an intervention aimed at improving mindfulness [Mindful Performance Enhancement, Awareness and Knowledge (mPEAK)] changes neural activation patterns during an interoceptive challenge. Participants completed a task involving anticipation and experience of loaded breathing during functional magnetic resonance imaging recording. There were five main results following mPEAK training: (1) elite athletes self-reported higher levels of interoceptive awareness and mindfulness and lower levels of alexithymia; (2) greater insula and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) activation during anticipation and post-breathing load conditions; (3) increased ACC activation during the anticipation condition was associated with increased scores on the describing subscale of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire; (4) increased insula activation during the post-load condition was associated with decreases in the Toronto Alexithymia Scale identifying feelings subscale; (5) decreased resting state functional connectivity between the PCC and the right medial frontal cortex and the ACC. Taken together, this pilot study suggests that mPEAK training may lead to increased attention to bodily signals and greater neural processing during the anticipation and recovery from interoceptive perturbations. This association between attention to and processing of interoceptive afferents may result in greater adaptation during stressful situations in elite athletes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".