Understanding the differences can help you choose a practice that suits your purpose.
When someone says, “You should try meditation,” a useful question is: “What kind?”
Meditation is an umbrella term. It covers practices that involve different instructions, different experiences and different commitments. Some train attention. Others cultivate awareness of thoughts and feelings. Transcendental Meditation is taught as a way of allowing mental activity to settle without deliberate concentration.
These distinctions matter to anyone considering learning. A shared intention—such as reducing stress—does not make two methods interchangeable. Equally, a difference in method does not, on its own, establish that one produces better results.
The starting point is to understand what you will actually be doing.
Different ways of using the mind
In focused-attention meditation, attention rests on a chosen object, often the breath. When the practitioner notices that attention has wandered, they return it to that object.
In open-monitoring meditation, the emphasis is broader: noticing thoughts, feelings and sensations as they arise, without becoming absorbed in them or judging them. A mindfulness programme may include both focused attention and open monitoring, rather than following a single approach throughout. [1]
This helps explain why “mindfulness” can mean different things in different conversations. Someone may be describing an everyday quality of awareness, a particular meditation exercise or a structured course. Before assessing a claim about mindfulness, it helps to establish which of these is meant.
Transcendental Meditation, or TM, uses a silently experienced mantra. It is taught as an effortless practice, without trying to hold attention steadily on an object or continually observe the contents of the mind. Adults generally practise for 20 minutes twice a day, sitting comfortably with their eyes closed. Learning involves personal instruction from a trained TM teacher, with continuing support available afterwards. [2]
TM teachers describe the intended experience as “restful alertness”: mental activity settling while wakefulness remains. This describes the character of the practice; it is not a requirement to manufacture a particular feeling or a promise that every meditation will be identical.
For an enquirer, these differences provide a practical starting point. Would you prefer an approach that develops the skill of directing or observing attention? Or does a practice taught without deliberate concentration appeal to you? What instruction and support would help you establish it in everyday life?
What about the outcomes?
The next question is what a practice has been shown to achieve.
Here, precision matters. A study of one programme, taught to a particular group of people over a particular period, provides evidence about those circumstances. It cannot automatically tell us what every form of meditation will do for everyone.
There are encouraging findings for TM. A randomised trial involving 80 healthcare workers compared TM with usual treatment over three months. Those assigned to TM showed greater improvements in anxiety and emotional exhaustion. However, the difference between groups on the study’s principal measure of psychological distress was not statistically significant. An accurate account includes both results. [3]
There are also encouraging findings for structured mindfulness programmes. In a clinical trial involving adults with anxiety disorders, an eight-week Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction course met the researchers’ criteria for being no less effective than escitalopram, an established medication, on the main anxiety outcome. This was evidence for a substantial, structured programme—not an indication that any brief mindfulness exercise would produce the same result. [4]
These studies were conducted in different populations and against different comparisons. They do not establish which meditation is better. They illustrate why the useful question is more specific: what evidence supports this technique for the outcome I am seeking?
The same care is needed with explanations involving the brain. An account of how a practice might work is not a substitute for evidence of what it achieves in daily life. For someone choosing a technique, improvements in how they feel and function are more meaningful than an impressive-sounding scientific explanation alone.
An honest conversation about safety
Benefits and unwanted effects can both be part of the picture.
The three-month healthcare-worker TM trial reported no adverse events. That is reassuring within the limits of that study, but it does not establish that difficulties never occur. [3]
In a smaller study of TM among people caring for someone with dementia, five participants reported eight adverse events they considered possibly related to the practice. Most were short-lived, and none required referral to a health professional. Their reports did not prove that TM caused the events, but they deserve acknowledgement. [5]
Research into meditation-related difficulties also shows how much the figures depend on what researchers ask. A passing unpleasant experience, a problem affecting daily functioning and a persistent deterioration are different outcomes. Studies that actively ask about a range of difficulties may identify more than those relying on participants to volunteer them. Comparing percentages without comparing the methods can therefore mislead. [6]
The evidence discussed here does not establish that TM is safer than mindfulness. Nor should a finding from one practice or programme be treated as a risk estimate for all meditation.
An enquirer is entitled to ask what difficulties have been reported, how a teacher responds to them and what support is available. Those questions belong alongside questions about benefits.
Making an informed choice
Before committing to a course, ask for a clear description of the practice, the daily time involved, the full cost and the teaching arrangements. Ask what follow-up support includes and which research is relevant to your own reasons for learning.
A teacher should be able to explain the approach clearly, acknowledge the limits of the evidence and welcome questions without making you feel that there is only one acceptable choice.
For those of us who teach TM, this means describing its distinctive method and the evidence for its benefits with care. We can explain why its effortless approach appeals to many people while respecting those who choose a different practice.
Not all meditations are the same. Understanding their differences should leave an enquirer better informed, free to choose and confident that the choice is their own.
Sources and further reading
- Colzato, L. S., Ozturk, A. and Hommel, B. (2012). Meditate to create: the impact of focused-attention and open-monitoring training on convergent and divergent thinking. Frontiers in Psychology.
- Transcendental Meditation. Frequently asked questions. The TM organisation’s description of its practice and teaching arrangements.
- (2022). Efficacy of Transcendental Meditation to Reduce Stress Among Health Care Workers: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Network Open.
- Hoge, E. A. and colleagues (2023; published online 2022). Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction vs Escitalopram for the Treatment of Adults With Anxiety Disorders: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Psychiatry.
- (2015). Transcendental Meditation for the improvement of health and wellbeing in community-dwelling dementia caregivers [TRANSCENDENT]: a randomised wait-list controlled trial. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine.
- Britton, W. B. and colleagues (2021). Defining and Measuring Meditation-Related Adverse Effects in Mindfulness-Based Programs. Clinical Psychological Science.