Simply defined by Langer (1989) as the act of noticing new things through attention and awareness, the concept of mindfulness has been enhanced to include the purposeful, non-judgmental acceptance of the present moment (Kabat-Zinn, 1994) by a set of practices based on breath control and meditation techniques. Being aware of the actual moment by purposefully paying attention also requires accepting the self and things the way they are and enables the inner mechanisms that control reactions or responses appropriately with the help of breathing as an anchor to bring thoughts into the present moment (Wells, 2002). This process creates a positive effect that balances affective and cognitive abilities, resulting in a chain reaction where one calmly pays attention, acknowledges, and accepts the present moment without judging, then experiences fruitful emotional and cognitive outcomes. Mortimore (2017) points out that “Mindfulness aims to teach us how to enter a more nourishing frame of mind by reducing distractive and ruminative thoughts” (p. 19). Plentiful research over 25 years has revealed that mindfulness has overall benefits in developing competence, memory, creativity, positive affect, health, and longevity while decreasing stress and accidents (Langer, 2000). Particularly, studies have also shown that mindfulness has positive correlations with and a promoting effect on decision-making abilities (Maymin and Langer, 2021) and critical thinking (Noone et al., 2016); attention, memory, and executive function for academic performance (Liu et al., 2021); and the social skills and academic outcomes of adolescents with learning disabilities (Beauchemin et al., 2008).

In education, learning is accepted as a lifelong process and comprises three domains formulated in Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956): cognitive domain (knowledge), which captures intellectual abilities such as recall and recognition; psychomotor domain (skills), which includes physical coordination and other motor skills; and affective domain (attitudes), which is based on feelings, values, and motivation (Hoque, 2016). The mindfulness approach, which originates in Buddhist spiritual doctrine and was transformed into a psychological coping strategy by Western scholars, serves pedagogy since it is positively associated with cognitive and affective abilities (Hayes et al., 2004; Karunananda et al., 2016; Schutt and Felver, 2020) to promote learning. According to Hyland (2011), mindfulness frees the mind from delusions and errors to enable genuine learning and cultivates awareness, which is a prerequisite for meaningful learning and teaching. The potential of mindfulness in educational contexts and student success was pointed out by Leland, “Mindfulness education appears to have a positive impact on academic performance by helping students – even those with learning disabilities – focus, be more organized, plan ahead, perform better on exams, and think critically” (2015, p. 23). Through contemplative exercises based on mindfulness, learners reconstruct meaning and take advantage of the learning process (Xue, 2023).

The application of mindfulness in education is mainly based on mindfulness-based interventions originally practiced in clinical psychology and psychiatry to cure mental health problems, such as stress, depression, and anxiety (Creswell, 2017; Bhattacharya and Hofman, 2023). Mindfulness interventions include specific techniques such as meditating with attention to breathing to connect with sensations or feelings while standing, sitting, lying down, or moving (Meiklejohn et al., 2012). In educational contexts, interventions have been carried out in public schools and universities for early-childhood children, adolescents, and young adults to cultivate learning and teaching by reducing stress and anxiety levels, academic performances, socio-emotional development, and social relationships of students (Hyland, 2013; Roeser, 2014; Indriaswuri et al., 2023; Smith, 2023; Erten and Güneş, 2024).

Studies have shown growing evidence of the effectiveness of mindfulness in academic achievement and student success (Caballero et al., 2019; Schutt and Felver, 2020; Dikmen, 2022; Indriaswuri et al., 2023; Mcbride and Greeson, 2023), yet some scholars have been cautious about mindfulness-based applications in education and argue their limitations in providing solutions for pedagogical issues (Sellman and Buttarazzi, 2020; Lee et al., 2024). Another issue of mindfulness is underlined by Ergas and Hadar (2019), who claim that mindfulness practice and mindfulness in education are two distinct spheres and should be handled separately; they further suggest a binary and paradoxical conceptualization of the role of mindfulness “as” education and “in” education.

All in all, the mindfulness approach is pertinent for education since the two share some common perspectives toward learning, as stated by Hyland (2011), who underlines the link between mindfulness and education: “both spheres involve the attention to and modification of consciousness and modes of thinking and both aim at a form of enlightened awareness which pays due attention to values and feelings” (p. 13). Hence, mindfulness practices may contribute to the academic and life skills of students (Hammad Al-Rashidi and Aberash, 2024), such as learning to learn, reflecting on their own learning, and making good life decisions to achieve overall academic and life goals. Furthermore, mindfulness practice as an everyday life doctrine should be integrated into the curricula of all educational levels to support students’ overall success.

Learning a foreign language mainly depends on various complex theoretical and practical processes. The dynamic nature of foreign language learning requires learning target language knowledge with receptive and productive skills through gradual practice integrated with cognitive (attention and memory), meta-cognitive (learning strategies), and individual, psychological, or affective factors (motivation, self-esteem, and attitude toward the target language) to master it thoroughly. According to Onwuegbuzie et al. (2000), the factors directly related to foreign language achievement are cognitive (like aptitude), affective (anxiety and others), personality (locus of control), and demographics (age, gender, and previous foreign language experience). The conceptualization of mindfulness has significant relevance in foreign language education, as it encompasses different but complementary approaches that influence learning outcomes. Langer (1989) interpretation of mindfulness, which emphasizes cognitive flexibility and active engagement in noticing new linguistic patterns, promotes adaptability, creativity, and deeper cognitive processing, which are all key factors in language acquisition and proficiency development (Moafian et al., 2019). According to Kabat-Zinn’s (1994) mindfulness framework, it is rooted in non-judgmental awareness and meditative practices and, therefore, plays a crucial role in managing language anxiety, enhancing emotional regulation, and promoting a more conducive, affective environment for language learning. Recognizing these different perspectives highlights the multidimensional impact of mindfulness on language learning, shaping both the cognitive and emotional dimensions of learner success. Additionally, mindfulness meditation has been linked to improvements in working memory capacity as well. Research suggests that mindfulness training can improve the regulation of attention, leading to better encoding and retrieval of information (Skelly and Estrada-Chichon, 2021; Kang, 2024). This is particularly beneficial in language learning, where retaining new vocabulary and grammatical structures is essential to achieving success. By promoting a heightened state of awareness, mindfulness practices enable learners to process and remember language information more effectively.

Affective factors play a vital role in foreign and second language learning as they interact with cognitive and meta-cognitive components (Arnold, 2021). These factors include emotions, moods, attitudes, and characteristics such as anxiety, motivation, self-esteem, and personality, all of which influence learning outcomes (Hurd, 2008; Bao and Liu, 2021). Krashen’s (1982) “affective filter hypothesis,” which builds on the work by Dulay and Burt (1977) in the 1970s, remains a cornerstone of second language acquisition theory (Luo, 2024). Arnold (2021) emphasizes that affective factors are central in the language classroom, as students’ confidence has a direct impact on their learning. Awareness of these factors enables teachers to implement strategies that lower affective filters, thereby promoting more effective language acquisition. To achieve this goal, some recent approaches, such as positive psychology in foreign language learning and teaching, which was introduced by MacIntyre and Gregersen (2012), have provided opportunities to create paths that address affective factors and positively exploit them for the sake of language learners. The tenets and contributions of positive psychology variables in language learning and teaching have been explained and conceptualized by Wang et al. (2021) as academic engagement, emotion regulation, enjoyment, grit, resilience, and wellbeing. It is accepted that mindfulness is pertinent, contributes to positive psychology variables and interventions that provide positive outcomes (Allen et al., 2021), and has positive correlations with overall academic achievement (Alomari, 2023; Indriaswuri et al., 2023). Studies such as those by Charoensukmongkol (2019), and Morgan and Katz (2021) show that mindfulness practices, including meditation and focused breathing, help learners manage stress and anxiety in foreign language classes, leading to increased confidence and willingness to communicate. These effects contribute to a more positive and effective language learning experience. Additionally, mindfulness can have a positive impact on the motivation of language learners by promoting a present-focused and non-judgmental attitude. This attitude helps learners to engage more deeply with the material, reduces the fear of making mistakes, and increases their willingness to participate. As learners become more attuned to their learning experiences without self-criticism, their intrinsic motivation to practice and improve their language skills is enhanced (Ghanizadeh et al., 2019; Ulivia et al., 2022).

The objective of this study is to examine whether mindfulness interventions and degrees of mindfulness capacities, measured by scales, are associated with foreign language education. To the author’s knowledge, there is a gap in the research field concerning the meta-analytic approach for experimental research undertaking mindfulness intervention and correlational studies based on the relationship between mindfulness and the different aspects of foreign language achievement. To gain a clearer understanding of the topic beyond past research, this study mainly relies on statistical analyses of total ESs that would contribute to the field. Thus, it aimed to gather the related intervention and correlational studies that yielded statistical results and carry out a meta-analysis of these results to obtain a total ES of mindfulness interventions and mindfulness scores associated with foreign language learning contexts.

To achieve this goal, the following research questions (R.Q.) are posed:

R.Q. 1. What is the effectiveness of mindfulness in achievement in foreign language education?

R.Q. 2. Does the effectiveness of mindfulness in achievement in foreign language education depend on region?

R.Q. 3. What is the relationship between mindfulness and foreign language education?

R.Q. 4. Does the relationship between mindfulness and foreign language education depend on region?

The relevant studies were searched within electronic databases, namely, Google Scholar, ERIC, Clarivate Web of Science, PubMed, PsychINFO, Council of Higher Education Theses Center, ProQuest, Scopus, Springer Link, and Science Direct. A keyword search was done using the terms “mindfulness in foreign language education,” “mindfulness in EFL learning,” “mindfulness in foreign language learning and teaching,” “mindfulness+foreign language education,” and “mindfulness interventions in foreign language learning and teaching.” As initial review criteria, open-access research articles, unpublished theses, and refereed full-text conference papers released between 2015 and 2024 were reviewed through hand search. Studies on ‘mindfulness in foreign language education’ have proliferated in recent years, reflecting a growing interest in its impact on language learning (Zeilhofer, 2020). The selection of studies was guided by their emergence over time, with a focus on research published between 2015 and 2024 to capture recent advances and contemporary perspectives in education and psychology. After identification by keyword relevance, the obtained studies were scrutinized according to the inclusion criteria.

To identify and select relevant studies eligible for the meta-analysis, the following inclusion and exclusion strategies were employed during the investigation:

Considering the relevance of the inclusion criteria, studies on mindfulness in foreign language education that were based on qualitative analyses, systematic reviews, and conceptual analyses were excluded from the contents of the meta-analysis. Qualitative studies were excluded from the meta-analysis because they lacked the quantitative data necessary to calculate effect sizes, which would compromise methodological rigor. While this decision may limit the exploration of nuanced perspectives, it ensures the validity and reliability of the quantitative synthesis. Additionally, studies that were not open access and lacked sufficient statistical measurement information (e.g., n, r, SD, or M values) were also not eligible for the meta-analysis.

The steps involved in the overall search and identification of eligible studies are displayed in Figure 1.

After the initial identification process, a breakdown of main characteristics of relevant studies was done to see the overall picture. 23 studies from 10 countries with a total of 3271 participants were included in the data set. Selected studies focused on mindfulness through interventions or correlational relationships to explore possible effects on different aspects of language performance, ranging from general success to vocabulary recall or reading comprehension. Table 1 illustrates the characteristics of the studies selected for the meta-analysis.

In the study, the possibility of regional effect was also measured by a moderator analysis to see whether mindfulness was applicable in different geographical regions and make the results more generalizable and heterogeneous as employed in other meta-analysis studies (Göçen and Şen, 2021; Chien, 2023). The mindfulness approach was derived from Eastern cultures long before it was transformed and began to be used in Western cultures lately. Most of the studies in the dataset were carried out in Eastern countries, which tells us that mindfulness is a recognized approach and regarded as a research interest in foreign language education as a part of the culture in these countries. Since the countries of selected articles examined mindfulness in different cultural and educational backgrounds and contexts, geography would be a distinctive variable. Since country scores in meta-analytic data are identified as a moderator variable (Hansen et al., 2022), to prevent a potential geographic selection bias for Eastern countries only, regional diversity in the study was considered as a variable, and studies from 10 countries were divided into two regional categories as Middle Eastern and Far Eastern countries in the moderator analysis.

A coding form was developed for studies eligible for the meta-analysis to facilitate data analysis. Given the scope of the research, the authors’ names, publication year, regions (Middle Eastern and Far Eastern countries), sample size (n), and calculated values (M, SD, and n) were coded as variables into coding sheets created by two independent raters. An agreement index was calculated between the codes to calculate intercoder reliability, which was to be 0.90. The analysis was conducted after disagreements between the raters were discussed and resolved.

Two methods were applied to calculate the ES index for the meta-analysis in this study: SMD for the experimental (intervention) design studies and Pearson product–moment correlation (r) for the correlational design studies. The common way to calculate SMD is by Cohen’s d, computed as a combination of n, M, and SD for control and experimental groups, as shown below:

where M 1 , M 2 , and S D p o o l e d represent the mean for group 1, mean for group 2, and the pooled standard deviation, respectively. The pooled standard deviation was computed as follows:

where n 1 and S D 1 represent the sample size and standard deviation for group 1 while and n 2 and S D 2 represent the sample size and standard deviation for group 2.

When the sample size is smaller than 20, Cohen’s d values are known to be biased. In this case, Hedges’ g value, an unbiased version of Cohen’s d, was applied as follows (Hedges, 1981):

where d , n 1 , and n 2 represent the Cohen’s d value, sample size for group 1, and sample size for group 2, respectively.

A positive Hedges’ g value suggests that the experimental group could have better achievement scores than the control group for the experimental design studies.

Moreover, Fisher’s z scale was applied for the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) to calculate the ES for each study as follows:

After all analyses were conducted by applying Fisher’s z transformation (i.e., ES), the results of the meta-analysis were converted back to the Pearson correlation coefficient as follows:

where z represents the Fisher’s z transformation value.

There are two methods commonly used in a meta-analysis: the fixed-effect model and the random-effects model (Hedges, 1992; Borenstein et al., 2009). In a fixed-effect model, it is assumed that each study in the meta-analysis belongs to a homogeneous population and the same ES parameter would be estimated, which is not exactly a realistic approach in social studies. Therefore, due to the assumption of heterogeneity, the random-effects model is preferred over the fixed-effect model (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001). Moreover, compared to the fixed-effect model, the random-effects model allows the results to be more generalizable.

The heterogeneity between studies is investigated by Q-statistics based on chi-square distribution, while the degree of heterogeneity was quantified by the I² statistic (Higgins et al., 2003). Since I² indicates the percentage of total variability in a set of ESs due to true heterogeneity (Huedo-Medina et al., 2006), it changes between 0% (no heterogeneity) and 100% (high-level heterogeneity). This value is computed as follows:

where k is the number of ESs.

In this study, the random-effects model approach was preferred to take assumptions of heterogeneity into consideration. After the model type (fixed-effect vs. random-effects) was decided, subgroup analyses were applied in cases of heterogeneity. Two subgroup analysis methods can be used in meta-analysis depending on moderator type. The ANOVA approach is proposed for the categorical moderators, while the meta-regression approach is recommended for the continuous moderators. In this study, the ANOVA approach was utilized to investigate whether mindfulness interventions and mindfulness scores are associated with foreign language learning based on region (Middle Eastern vs. Far Eastern countries), which is a categorical moderator.

Publication bias is a potential and common problem in meta-analyses that occurs when only published studies about a research topic are included. It is known that studies with significant and interesting results are more likely to be published than those without such characteristics (Sutton et al., 2000; Thornton and Lee, 2000). This means that a meta-analysis does not include unpublished studies, which may make the results invalid. Different methods are recommended to investigate the possibility of publication bias in meta-analyses, such as the funnel plot, Egger’s test, rank correlation test, and fail-safe N method. A funnel plot indicates the relationship between standard error and ESs. Publication bias is expected when the relationship is not symmetric/funnel-shaped (Light and Pillemer, 1984). The limitation of a funnel plot is that whether the shape is symmetric is informally defined and visually tested. Therefore, publication bias tests for funnel plot asymmetry are recommended to reach a valid conclusion about publication bias (Begg and Mazumdar, 1994; Egger et al., 1997). Here, there is no publication bias if the p-value is not significant at the alpha level (e.g., 0.05). The aim of Rosenthal’s (1979) fail-safe N method is to show the number of unpublished studies required to make the average ES value found statistically significant in the meta-analysis study not statistically significant (Rothstein et al., 2006). The fact that this number, found using the 5k + 10 (k = sample size), is large indicates that there is no publication bias. Like other statistical analyses, publication bias methods were tested using JASP software version 0.18.3.