← Explore

Facilitating Meditation with Focused Ultrasound Neuromodulation: A Sham-Controlled Crossover Study in Long-Term and Novice Meditators

Joshua Cain, Micah Johnson, Amirvala Tavakoli, Tracy Brandmeyer, Ninette Simonian, Geena Wang, Jezabel May, Alexander Bystritsky, Shinzen Young, Joseph Lacoste Sanguinetti, Matthew Sacchet, Nicco Reggente

2026 · 10.31234/osf.io/6gjdp_v1

human healthyhealthybehaviourautonomic physiologyclinical scale

Abstract

Sustained contemplative practice confers well-documented psychological and physiological benefits, yet the experiential deepening that motivates practitioners can require many hours of practice, and mastery is not assured. Methods that accelerate training would broaden access to these benefits and could also test mechanism: the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), caudate, and anterior insula are implicated in meditation, but only correlationally. We used low-intensity transcranial focused ultrasound (FUS) to ask whether reversibly perturbing each region shifts meditative experience in real time. In a single-blind, sham-controlled, counterbalanced crossover design, long-term practitioners of insight meditation in the S.N. Goenka Vipassana tradition (LTMs; n = 36) and meditation-naïve novices (n = 12; an exploratory cohort; meditation experience not randomized) received 12 minutes of inhibition-biased (5% duty cycle) FUS to the PCC, bilateral caudate, or bilateral anterior insula, or sham, in separate sessions during hour-long meditation. Every ~4 minutes, participants rated meditative depth (anchored from “extremely shallow” to “extremely deep”) and intensity (relative to their normal experience, along any dimension), with autonomic, mood, and trait measures as secondary outcomes. Sham-relative changes in rating trajectories were tested with generalized linear mixed models and false discovery rate (FDR)-corrected contrasts. In LTMs, caudate stimulation produced a significantly steeper rise in depth than sham and insula stimulation; in novices, PCC stimulation produced a significantly steeper rise in depth than sham, caudate, and insula stimulation, such that the caudate-versus-PCC difference in depth slopes differed significantly between groups, reversing in sign. No target altered intensity relative to sham, insula stimulation had no sham-relative effect on meditation, and post-session mood and trait measures were unchanged. Autonomic effects were modest and did not account for the meditative effects, and expectation of benefit did not differ across conditions in LTMs. FUS neuromodulation can causally and region-specifically accelerate meditative deepening, with the effective target differing by meditation experience (caudate in LTMs, PCC in novices), a dependence that may reflect practice itself or its correlates. Tempered by the single-blind protocol, the small novice cohort, and effects extending beyond sonication, these findings establish proof-of-principle for neuromodulatory facilitation of meditation and motivate individualized, closed-loop applications.

Abstract via europepmc.

Specieshuman
Subjects36, 12swept participants
Sessions per subject4
Randomisednot reported
Blindingsingle
Sham / controlinactive transducer
Auditory controlmatched device sound
Readout timingonline
Anaesthesianot applicable
Readoutsbehaviour, autonomic physiology, clinical scale — meditative depth and intensity ratings (1-5) every ~4 min; heart rate, HRV, respiration rate, galvanic skin response; POMS, TMS, EDI, MEDI and other trait questionnaires
Direction of effectmixed or unclearInhibition-biased FUS: in long-term meditators caudate stimulation produced a steeper rise in meditative depth than sham and insula; in novices PCC stimulation did so; insula had no sham-relative effect; no target altered intensity.
Adverse eventsnot reportedSafety assessed by analytical and numerical estimates of mechanical index and thermal index (TIC 0.45-0.70 nominal); participants guessed sham versus real after each session.

Exposures

Exposure 1: PCC

Target: posterior cingulate cortex — “posterior cingulate cortex (PCC)”
Device: BrainSonix · BrainSonix Corporation · BrainSonix Pulsar 1002 ✓

Pulse timing
Waveformpulsed
Fundamental frequency (kHz)650✓✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)0.5✓✓✓
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)100✓✓✓
Duty cycle (%)5pulse duration × PRF gives 5%✓✓✓
Sonication duration (s)10✓✓✓⚑
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)30✓✓✓
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)1.5✓✓✓
In-situ estimatesimulationsingle value
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)2.94✓✓✓
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)0.147✓✓✓
Protocol, in the paper’s words

5% duty cycle (100 Hz PRF, 0.5 ms pulses) delivered in 10-second on-off blocks over a 12-minute period beginning after minute 12 of a 60-minute meditation; bilateral targets received 6 min per hemisphere sequentially.

Exposure 2: Bilateral caudate

Target: caudate nucleus — “bilateral heads of the caudate nucleus”
Device: BrainSonix · BrainSonix Corporation · BrainSonix Pulsar 1002 ✓

Pulse timing
Waveformpulsed
Fundamental frequency (kHz)650✓✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)0.5✓✓✓
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)100✓✓✓
Duty cycle (%)5pulse duration × PRF gives 5%✓✓✓
Sonication duration (s)10✓✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)30✓✓✓
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)1.5✓✓✓
In-situ estimatesimulationsingle value
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)2.3✓✓✓
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)0.115✓✓✓
Protocol, in the paper’s words

5% duty cycle (100 Hz PRF, 0.5 ms pulses) delivered in 10-second on-off blocks over a 12-minute period beginning after minute 12 of a 60-minute meditation; bilateral targets received 6 min per hemisphere sequentially.

Exposure 3: Bilateral anterior insula

Target: anterior insula — “bilateral ventral anterior insula”
Device: BrainSonix · BrainSonix Corporation · BrainSonix Pulsar 1002 ✓

Pulse timing
Waveformpulsed
Fundamental frequency (kHz)650✓✓✓
Pulse duration (ms)0.5✓✓✓
Pulse repetition frequency (Hz)100✓✓✓
Duty cycle (%)5pulse duration × PRF gives 5%✓✓✓
Sonication duration (s)10✓✓✓
Pressure and intensity, by domain
Free-field pressure (kPa)not reported
Free-field Isppa (W/cm²)30✓✓✓
Free-field Ispta (W/cm²)1.5✓✓✓
In-situ estimatesimulationsingle value
In-situ pressure (kPa)not reported
In-situ Isppa (W/cm²)3.8✓✓✓
In-situ Ispta (W/cm²)0.19✓✓✓
Protocol, in the paper’s words

5% duty cycle (100 Hz PRF, 0.5 ms pulses) delivered in 10-second on-off blocks over a 12-minute period beginning after minute 12 of a 60-minute meditation; bilateral targets received 6 min per hemisphere sequentially.

Flags from extraction

  • n_subjects — Groups of 36 long-term meditators and 12 novices; total not stated, so group sizes listed.
  • exposures[0].timing.sonication_duration_s — Paper gives '10-second on-off blocks' within a 12-minute period; the length of the on block is taken as 10 s, total 12 min (6 min per side for bilateral targets) is in the protocol description.
  • exposures[0].in_situ.method — In situ intensities are estimates from per-target numerical simulation through a CT-derived skull model.
  • n_sessions_per_subject — Four experimental sessions stated in words ('four experimental sessions'), plus one imaging visit.
  • randomised — Order of conditions counterbalanced across participants; random assignment not stated.
  • adverse_events — No adverse event reporting found in the text.