Evidence Hub

The Neuroscience of Religious and Spiritual Practices: A Systematic Review of Neurotheological Evidence

Husain W, Ammar A, Wusqa UT, Farooq M, Tariq Z, Pandi-Perumal SR, BaHammam AS, Trabelsi K et al.

Brain and behavior, 2026

Abstract

Background: Religious and spiritual practices are among the most ancient and universal human behaviors, yet their neurobiological substrates remain incompletely characterized. Neurotheology-the scientific study of the relationship between spiritual experience and brain function-has produced growing evidence that such practices generate measurable, systematic, and neuroplastic changes in brain structure and function. However, prior reviews have been limited to single practice types, narrow evidence bases, or narrative methods, with none synthesizing the full spectrum of traditions, practices, and neuroimaging modalities in a single review.

Methods: Adhering to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered on the Open Science Framework, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, and ProQuest (23 sub-databases) were searched from inception to June 30, 2026. Eligible studies comprised those using objective neuroimaging or neurophysiological techniques. After multi-stage screening, 105 studies (1998-2026) were synthesized narratively using the synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) framework, given substantial heterogeneity.

Results: Studies spanned Buddhist, Christian, Islamic, Hindu, Santo Daime, Spiritist, Sant Mat, and mixed traditions, examining meditation, prayer, chanting, recitation, worship, retreat, mystical experience, mediumistic trance, and ritual altered states. Consistent engagement appeared across the prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate, default mode network (DMN), insula, amygdala,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free