Gratitude

Gratitude in Buddhist and Stoic texts

Buddhist scripture in the Pali canon includes a pair of short discourses titled the Kataññu Suttas (Anguttara Nikāya 2.31-32). In Thanissaro Bhikkhu's English translation, published in 2002, they contrast people of no integrity, described as ungrateful and unthankful, with people of integrity, described as grateful and thankful, and they say that parents are hard to repay. The page reviewed does not date the discourses, and a modern translation is not evidence of how the text was used in practice.

In Roman Stoic philosophy, Seneca wrote On Benefits (De beneficiis), a work about giving and receiving favours. A 2019 article in the classical-studies journal Prometheus examines one question within that work, whether the debt of gratitude is cancelled if a former benefactor later offends the recipient. It reports that Seneca sets out three moral perspectives on weighing benefit against offence and prefers one more compassionate than strict Stoic doctrine would usually allow. The article is a close study of one passage, so it does not support a general account of gratitude in Stoicism.

Islamic scripture and traditions not covered here

In the Qur'an, sura 14 (Ibrāhīm), verse 7 reports a proclamation that if its listeners are grateful they will be given more, while denial brings a severe punishment. The page reviewed shows the Arabic verb translated as 'are grateful' and attributes its English rendering to the Noor International Center. How the verse is interpreted belongs to Islamic exegesis, which the sources reviewed do not cover, so it is cited here only as a primary text and not as evidence for any technique.

The sources opened for this draft do not cover Jewish, Christian, Hindu or Confucian writing on gratitude, and no claim is made about them. Readers should not infer that these traditions are absent from the history of gratitude, only that they were not verified for this record.

Experimental research from 2003

Systematic experimental work on gratitude as an exercise is recent. Emmons and McCullough published a set of three studies in 2003 in which participants were assigned to gratitude-focused conditions or comparison conditions. Seligman and colleagues followed in 2005 with a randomised internet study of several purported happiness exercises. Both papers sit within positive psychology, a field whose stated aim in the 2005 paper is to complement interventions that relieve suffering.

In 2010 Wood, Froh and Geraghty reviewed the research and proposed a model of gratitude that includes not only gratitude after help from others but also a habitual focus on and appreciation of the positive aspects of life. The review judged gratitude interventions promising while noting that the positive psychology literature may have neglected current limitations.

One word, several meanings

Wood and colleagues describe gratitude in two senses: the response that follows help received from another person, and a wider habit of attending to and appreciating the good in life. A gratitude practice usually aims at the second sense, although many exercises, such as a letter of thanks, also involve the first. Studies of gratitude as a personal characteristic and studies of gratitude exercises answer different questions and should not be merged.

Names of exercises in research

Research uses several labels for the exercises. Emmons and McCullough called their task counting blessings or gratitude listing and compared it with listing hassles. A 2025 cross-cultural meta-analysis grouped interventions into counting blessings, remembering gratitude, expressing gratitude such as writing letters, counterfactual thinking, psychoeducation and mixed formats, and its authors report that counting blessings was the most frequent type. A 2024 pilot trial used the term gratitude journaling for a written exercise.

Relation to mindfulness and meditation

Some authors place gratitude alongside mindfulness. One 2013 article in the Journal of Clinical Psychology calls gratitude one of the sisters of mindfulness and describes it, with forgiveness, compassion and loving-kindness, as a tenet of Buddhist psychology. That is one author's framing. Machipedia treats gratitude practice, mindfulness and meditation as separate entries, because a journal exercise that asks a person to list what they appreciate is a different intervention from a mindfulness course, and findings for one should not be carried over to the other.

Listing and journaling exercises

In the 2003 experiments, participants kept weekly or daily records after being assigned to list things they were grateful for, to list hassles, or to list neutral events or social comparisons. A 2024 pilot trial in 26 breast cancer survivors asked the gratitude group to journal twice weekly for eight weeks, while a comparison group wrote down daily memories. These are examples of study protocols and not a standard programme.

Letters, recall and combined formats

The 2025 meta-analysis covered recalling gratitude, expressing gratitude in letters and mixed formats as well as listing. It found larger effects when several types of exercise were combined than for single types. The 2005 study delivered its exercises over the internet, so a facilitator was not necessarily involved. The sources reviewed do not describe the content of a gratitude visit or other contemplative gratitude practices from religious settings in enough detail to summarise them here.

Delivery, dose and training

Frequency, length and instructions differ widely between studies, and one meta-analysis lists high heterogeneity between study methodologies as a limitation. The sources reviewed do not report how often gratitude exercises are led by a trained facilitator rather than done alone, and they describe no recognised training standard, professional register or protected title for gratitude practitioners. No search of professional bodies was made for this draft, so this is a statement about the sources reviewed and not a finding that none exists.

Uses described by researchers

Emmons and McCullough concluded that a conscious focus on blessings may have emotional and interpersonal benefits. Seligman and colleagues tested exercises as ways to raise happiness and reduce depressive symptoms. Wood and colleagues described gratitude as relevant to clinical psychology because simple exercises might improve well-being, and the authors of a 2023 meta-analysis concluded that gratitude acts could be a complement to treatment for anxiety and depression. A 2024 pilot study examined spiritual well-being and exercise self-efficacy in breast cancer survivors.

Claims not examined in the sources reviewed

Claims that extend beyond mood and well-being outcomes, for example to sleep, physical health, relationship satisfaction or recovery from addiction, were not examined in the sources reviewed for this draft, and none is asserted here. The 2024 pilot found no significant difference in inflammatory markers between groups, so a biological benefit is not established by that study.

The original experiments

In the 2003 paper, two studies randomly assigned participants to gratitude listing, hassles, or neutral events or social comparison, and a third randomised people with neuromuscular disease to gratitude or control. The authors report heightened well-being on several, though not all, outcome measures, with positive affect the most robust. The 2005 paper reports a six-group randomised internet study in which three of five happiness exercises lastingly increased happiness and decreased depressive symptoms; its abstract does not name which three. No dedicated replication of either study was identified in the searches made for this draft, which does not show that none exists.

Earlier syntheses

A 2010 review by Wood and colleagues questioned how well gratitude interventions had been tested. A 2016 meta-analysis found gratitude exercises outperformed measurement-only controls on psychological well-being (d = 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.58, five studies) and an alternative activity (d = 0.17, 0.09 to 0.24, twenty studies), but not on anxiety (d = 0.11, -0.08 to 0.31). Against psychologically active comparison exercises the difference was negligible (d = -0.03, -0.13 to 0.07, nine studies).

Recent meta-analyses

A 2023 systematic review included 64 randomised trials. Pooled analyses of few trials favoured gratitude exercises, for example a mean difference of -1.63 on the GAD-7 anxiety scale (95% CI -2.37 to -0.89, three trials) and -1.86 on the PHQ-9 depression scale (-2.89 to -0.83, three trials). Certainty was rated low or very low, and most studies were at high risk of bias on the RoB 2 tool.

A preregistered 2025 meta-analysis of 145 papers and 24,804 participants from 28 countries reported a small average increase in well-being (Hedges g = 0.19, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.22). Effects varied between countries without an identified explanation, heterogeneity was moderate (I-squared 57.2%), the prediction interval included zero, with larger effects in randomised than quasi-experimental studies. A 2024 rapid review of life-satisfaction trials in high-income countries reported a pooled difference of 0.19 (0.11 to 0.27).

Bias, certainty and what remains unclear

The 2025 authors judged their result robust to publication bias, with a bias-adjusted estimate of g = 0.15. A 2019 reanalysis of two meta-analyses of positive psychology interventions in general, not gratitude alone, found that many primary studies were small and that, once small-sample bias was accounted for, the effect on well-being fell to about r = 0.10 and the effect on depression was variable and generally not significant. It should not be read as a gratitude-specific estimate.

The sources report small average effects on self-reported well-being, uncertain effects on depression and anxiety, mixed comparison with active control exercises and little follow-up evidence. A 2024 pilot of 26 breast cancer survivors found improved spiritual well-being but no significant group difference in gratitude or stress, and it cannot show efficacy.

Adverse effects are rarely reported

In the parts of the 2023 and 2025 meta-analyses read for this draft, adverse effects of gratitude exercises were not discussed, and the 2016 meta-analysis abstract reports only efficacy outcomes. Not reporting harms is not evidence that none occur. The pilot trial in cancer survivors measured inflammatory markers and reported a non-significant rise in IL-6 in the gratitude group, which is mentioned for completeness and not as a finding of harm.

Context, pressure and fit

The sources reviewed do not address how gratitude exercises are experienced by people in grief, trauma, illness or ongoing injustice, or whether being encouraged to feel grateful in such circumstances has unwanted effects. Absence of a source is not evidence that no concern exists, and a human reviewer should add verified sources on this question before the page is relied on. The 2025 meta-analysis found that effects differed between countries and that a future study might find none, so results from one setting should not be assumed to apply to another.

Training, regulation and care boundaries

No statutory regulation or training standard specific to gratitude practice was found in the sources reviewed. Gratitude exercises are generally described by researchers as complements to, not replacements for, clinical care, and they do not replace assessment or treatment for depression, anxiety, trauma or other conditions. A person with persistent low mood, distress or thoughts of self-harm should seek assessment from a health professional or local crisis service.