Beyond Universality: Do All Adolescent Minds Benefit from Mindfulness?
PsyArXiv Preprints July 9, 2026 Peer reviewed DOI: osf:tnf5d_v1 via PsyArXiv
Summary
School-based mindfulness trainings vary in effectiveness for adolescents depending on curriculum design, teacher qualities, developmental stage, and school context. Programs that include embodied mind-body practices and adequate practice dosage tend to work better. Teachers who personally practice mindfulness and engage relationally with students improve outcomes. Developmental factors such as age and metacognitive capacity matter, and assessment raises ethical challenges. Contextual influences at the school and sociocultural level also shape results. Assuming universal effectiveness overlooks these sources of variability and may explain null or negative outcomes in some studies. The paper offers a framework for future research and implementation.
Study at a glance
| Design | theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key finding | The effectiveness of school-based mindfulness trainings for adolescents depends on curriculum characteristics, teacher qualities, developmental considerations, and contextual influences; assuming universal effectiveness can overlook important sources of variability and may explain null or negative outcomes. |
Abstract
Despite the rapid global implementation of school-based mindfulness trainings (SBMTs), empirical findings regarding their effectiveness in children and adolescents remain inconsistent. Large-scale trials and recent meta-analyses have challenged early optimism, raising critical questions about for whom, under what conditions, and through which mechanisms SBMTs may be beneficial. This paper provides a synthesis of key factors, grounded in both theory and practice, that may help explain why mindfulness interventions vary in their effectiveness for adolescents. Based on existing research and insights from implementing SBMTs in school settings, we examine four interrelated domains: (1) curriculum characteristics, with particular attention to the role of embodied, mind–body practices and practice dosage; (2) the contribution of teachers, including personal mindfulness practice, embodiment, and relational engagement; (3) developmental considerations related to age, metacognitive capacity, and ethical challenges in assessment; and (4) contextual influences at the level of the school ecosystem and broader sociocultural environment. We argue that assuming universal effectiveness can overlook important sources of variability and may help explain the null or even negative outcomes reported in some studies. By reframing SBMTs as context-sensitive, developmentally attuned, and relationally embedded practices, this paper advances a conceptual framework to guide future research, intervention design, and implementation in educational settings.