Appendix. Summary of Published SMT Studies
Intervention
First author and
Statistical Significance (SS) of main results
N=pre/post
Category/N
Year of publication
Key inferential statistical methods
Level of evidence
1.Muscle
Bassett, 1977
relaxation/7
STAI: Relaxation technique groups showed significant decrease while the music groups did not.
N=60/Not
(p<.05).
reported
Expectancy: Expectancy manipulation accounted for over half of the variance in the dependent
Level II
measure (w²=.53). A significant main effect was found for instructions (p< .001).
ANOVA
Colosetti, 2000
1.PTSD: No difference between RT and EMDR
N=5/5
2.Anxiety with BAI: No difference between RT and EMDR
Level IV
Statistical methods not provided
Lutz, 1990
(Significance level used: α ≤ .05)
N=42/40
1.No significant difference was found on any of the dependent variables between the control group
Level III
and the treatment group.
MANOVA, t-test, Chi-square
Murphy, 1995
(Significance level used: α ≤ .05)
N=31/27
1.Anger:No significant difference between treatment groups
Level II
2.Impulsivity: No significant difference between treatment groups
3.Cortisol levels: Significant difference was found in PRT group only (20 vs 40 min, p=.026,
w²=.180)
4.Egocentrism: Significant group differences in favor of MM found on the negative self focused
subscale (p=.008, w²=.186).
5.One month follow up: No significant differences between groups.
One way ANOVA, ANOVA, ANCOVA
Shanmugam,
1: Extroversion/introversion: No significant changes were found pre and post test between the three
N=265/134
1992
research groups in this category (p=.05).
Level III
2.Neuroticism: TM had increased scores while RT group did not change. In post-test 2 the TM had a
significant more score in this category then the control group (t=2.0, p=.05).
3.Self ideal self in congruency: TM showed significant decrease compared to both control group and
RT group (p=.01).
4.Verbal Creativity: Both TM (p=.05) and RT groups (p=.01) increased creativity scores compared
to control group.
Chi-square, ANOVA, Critical ratio
Toler, 1978
1.Sleep:No significant difference was found between groups, except progressive relaxation group
N=27/24
with stimulus control had significantly reduced night awakenings compared to control group
Level II
(p<.05).
2.STAI: State anxiety was significantly reduced pre to post-test for both treatment groups compared
to control group (p<.05).
3:Locus of control: No significant pre and post-test differences.
4.No significant changes were maintained on eight week follow up.
One way ANOVA, Scheffe’s post hoc test
Vasilos, 1979
SS missing from article.
N=60/60
Level IV
1.Skin temperature: Both high and low baseline groups reached a significantly higher absolute skin
temperature during second training session
2.Subjective anxiety scale: Both relaxation training and autogenic suggestion groups displayed
significantly greater tension/anxiety reductions in session 1 then direction instruction groups.
ANCOVA
2.Transcend
ental
Meditation/6
Alexander,
1982
See other three articles by same author below. They cover all the major findings from this study.
See next three
This is the original dissertation they are based on.
rows below with
same Primary
Investigator
Alexander
2003
1.Ego development: TM group advanced more then one step, significant compared to the four
N=271/264*
comparison groups (p<.0025).
Level III
2.States of consciousness: Advanced active and new active TM members scored higher on the postconceptual experience factor then Non-TM-members (F=6.47, p<.01, r=.2989).
***
3.STAI: Trend for TM improvement compared to comparison groups (p<.10).
4. Other variables: Aggression decreased in TM members (p<.005) compared to comparison groups.
Correlation, One way ANOVA
Alexander(b)
1.Recidivism rates (RR) were measured every six months, from six months to 30 months: TM had
N=286/286(Retros
2003
32% RR compared to 48% in the combined sample of members of the other four programs
pective Study)
(Z=1.725, =0.42).
Level III
Chi square test, Multiple regression analysis
Alexander(c)
1.Psychopathology factor: TM group members scored significantly lower, indicating less
281/165*
2003
psychopathology, then the Interested Group (IG) and the Not Interested Group (NIG) ranging from
Level III
-.75 to -.90 (p<.001).
***
2.Developmental factor: TM group members scored significantly higher then the total non-member
group, (d=.65, p<.001).
3.Consciousness factor: TM group scored significantly higher then all nonmember categories,
ranging in effect size from .49 to .82 (p=.05to<.01).
Factor analysis
Ballou, 1977
1.STAI: Significant posttest differences between both control group and experimental group in both
N=66/38 for STAI
dimensions (p<.001)
Level III
2.Increased participation in “prison activities “ significantly: (p>.01)
ANCOVA
Cunningham,1
1.STAI: At six weeks and 15 weeks after beginning TM the TM group had significantly less
Eventual n for
977
anxiety in both scales (p<.001) then the control group of non-meditators.
treatment group
2.Likert scale on psychological symptoms: Was not compared to control group
was 15.
ANOVA
Level III
Significant differences were found between treatment and control groups on the following
N=300/149
dependent variables:
Level III
Hawkins, 2003
1.Cognitive distortion (p<.036)
2.Intelligence related measures (p<.05)
ANOVA, MANOVA, ANCOVA, Chi-square test, Factor analysis
Orme—
1.SSSR: Decrease significantly greater for regular meditators (RM) compared to irregular
N=17/10
Johnson , 2003
meditators (IM) (t=4.92, p<.001) and non-meditators (NM) (t=1.89, p<.05)
Level III
2.MMPI: RM’s decreased significantly more then NM’s on scale 7, Obsessive compulsive behavior
and psychasthenia (t=2.53, p<.025) and scale 10, social introversion (t=2.22, p<.05). And more then
IM’s on scale 7 (t=2.14, p<.05).
ANOVA, Correlation
Rainforth, 2003
1.Recidivism rates (RR): Survival analysis based on the Cox regression model indicated that risk of
N=306/248
recidivism in TM group compared to control group was reduced by 43.5% (p=.0008).
Level III
2. Severity of offenses: A “measure of severity” indicated that it was lower for the TM group
compared to the control group (p=.023).
Survival analysis- Cox regression
Shanmugam,
See discussion above, in category 1.
1992
3.Other
Bowen, 2006
1.Three months post intervention: Significant less substance use on 4/5 measures compared to TAU
N=305/173 post-
Eastern
(p<.05). Also significantly less psychiatric symptoms, more optimism and drinking related locus of
course assessment,
meditative
control compared to TAU (p<.05).
Level III
practices/12.
2.Six months post intervention: No significant difference in recidivism rates between the groups.
Chi-square- Independent samples t-test
Bunk, 1979
1.Internal locus of control: Significant differences using ANOVA between treatment groups and
N=100/81
control group (p< .001)
Level II
2.Anxiety: Only the Yoga plus meditation group reduced it significantly more then control group
(p≤ .05).
3.Institutional adjustment: No significant difference found (p≤ .05).
4.Difference between treatment groups: The Yoga plus meditation group did better then Yoga only
and meditation only numerically on all measures, but not significantly
(p≤ .05).
One way ANOVA, ANOVA, MANOVA
Chandiraman,
1998
Significant improvement were found on most psychological parameters, including considerable
Level III
reductions in anxiety (p<.001) and depression (p<.001).
Chi-square, paired t-test, descriptive statistics
Jain, 2003
Khurana,1998
No statistical methods were given and no levels of significance, but according to the author the
N=28/28
intervention yielded significant improvements on all measures of the study
Level III
The female inmates in the Vipassana group did have reduced criminal propensity and increased
Level III
subjective well being post intervention (p<.01). The males did appear to have statistically significant
benefits on their subjective well being (p<.01). It also appeared that the longer and more intense the
training is, the better the outcome is for the male prisoners on these variables.
Descriptive statistics and t-tests
Murphy, 1995
See discussion above, in category 1.
Perkins, 1995
1.Coping skills: Treatment group (TG) proved significantly higher in coping effectiveness then both
control groups (p<.000). Decrease in global levels of distress was also found comparing TG to the
N=167/111
attention control group (p<.043) and the wait list control group (p<.000).
Level II
2.STAXI: TG demonstrated a significant decrease in situational anger compared to the wait list
control group (p<.006) and angry responding (p<.001) but not the attention control group.
3.Sick calls: None of the three groups displayed any significant changes in utilization of medical
services pre and post-test.
ANOVA, Independent t-test, Regression analysis
Ranganathan,
Younger inmates appeared more open to VM. They further revealed that the inmates felt the VM
2008
was helpful in obtaining peace and holding anger in check as well as in managing stress and
Level IV
understanding themselves better.
Descriptive statistics based on information quantified from interviews. No SS given.
Samuelson,
1.Hostility: All subscales showed significant post MBSR course improvement (p= .0001).
N= 1350/955-948-
2007
2.Self esteem: Significant increases found in all settings post MBSR course (p=.0001). Women
907
fared better then men, 8.3% vs. 3.8% (p=.006).
Level III
3.Mood disturbance: All six subscales showed significant improvement post MBSR course
completion.
Paired t-test
Sumter, 2009
The experimental group experienced fewer sleeping difficulties (p=.01), and a reduced desire to
throw things or hit people (p=.007). Nail biting also decreased (p=.002). The experimental group
Level II
also felt less guilty at post test (p=.002) and less hopeless about the future (p=.006).
Independent sample and paired t-tests
Simpson, 2007
1.PTSD: PTSD severity of symptoms did not differ significantly between those who volunteered for
N=174/88
the VM course and those who did not, F(1,86)<1.
2.Substance abuse and PTSD: Treatment group did show greater reductions in substance abuse then
Level III
control group regardless of PTSD symptom severity levels (p<.001).
t-test, Chi-square test, ANCOVA, Regression analysis
Vannoy, 2006
1.The anger subscale of the Aggression Questionnaire: Significant reductions were found in anger
N=90/56
with female participants of study (d= -.83, p<.05).
2.Changes on all other dependent variables did not reach statistical significance.
Level III
Correlation, ANOVA, ANCOVA
4.Cognitive
Forde, 2005
methods/2.
No significant pre-post intervention differences were found on any of the dependent variables.
N=130/31
One way ANOVA- Independent sample t-test- Paired sample t-test
Level II
Vannoy, 2006
See discussion above, in Category 3.
5.Autogenic
Thomson,
1.STAI: Reduced in Biofeedback Group (BG) on both scales (State: p=.005 and trait: p=.001) and
training and
1988
Guided Imagery Group (GIG) (State: p=.007 and trait: p=.05). No significant change found in
biofeedback/
Autogenic training group (ATG).
2.
2.Locus of control: BG dropped in powerful others (p=.001) and rise in chance scores (p=.006) post-
N=86/82
Level II
test. Aslo significant for ATG for chance scale increase (.023) after treatment. And GIG dropped in
powerful other scores significantly (p=.004)
3.Incident reports: No significant changes pre and post test in the groups.
4. Physical health symptoms: Only significant difference pre and post test1 in BG (p=.004) and post
test 2 (p=.005).
5.Psychotropics used: No significant results due to small sample size using psychotropics
Correlation, ANOVA, Multiple t-tests, ANCOVA, MANOVA
Vasilos, 1979
See discussion above, in category 1.
6. Music
Bassett, 1977
See discussion above, in category 1.
Therapy/3.
Daveson, 2001
Thaut, 1989
Level V
1.Self perceived changes on general beneficial effects of music therapy: Significant positive change
N=50/5
pre and post test on all scales in regards to state of relaxation, mood/emotion and thoughts about
self, with all groups (p<.05).
ANOVA
7. EMDR/1
Colosetti, 2000
See discussion above, in category 1.
Level II