A systematic review of 22 studies found that Tai Chi correlates with favorable changes in both brain activity and psychological outcomes like depression and anxiety, but most studies don't establish direct causal links between the two, and the evidence base is too heterogeneous to guide clinical decisions.
Researchers conducted a systematic scoping review to map the current evidence on Tai Chi in relation to brain activity and psychological outcomes. They searched three major databases without date restrictions and identified 22 eligible studies that measured at least one neurophysiological marker (brain activity or function) alongside at least one psychological or cognitive-emotional outcome. The final sample included randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparative studies, and cross-sectional designs, mostly conducted in older adults, university students, and some clinical populations.
The neural measurement techniques varied considerably. Electroencephalography and event-related potentials (EEG/ERP) dominated the literature, followed by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). The psychological domains studied were similarly diverse, spanning depression, anxiety, emotion regulation, cognitive function, and fatigue. Across all modalities, the most consistent pattern was the co-occurrence of favorable psychological findings with Tai Chi-related neural changes. However, this is a critical methodological distinction: most studies reported these changes in parallel rather than formally testing whether brain changes predicted or explained psychological improvements.
When researchers examined studies that did explicitly test brain-behavior associations, the strongest signal emerged in fMRI studies investigating depression, fatigue, and emotion-related outcomes, where statistically significant favorable associations were most evident. EEG/ERP studies also showed favorable associations for anxiety and cognitive-emotional outcomes. A single fNIRS study reported positive associations for emotional memory. Yet even these firmer associations come with important caveats: the evidence base remains methodologically heterogeneous, with different populations, Tai Chi protocols, study designs, and outcome measures making direct comparisons difficult. The authors emphasize that while parallel neural and psychological improvements are encouraging, they do not establish mechanism or causality.
The reviewers explicitly cautioned against over-interpreting the findings. They note that the literature is growing but unevenly distributed, with identifiable evidence clusters (particularly in depression and emotion regulation) alongside substantial gaps. Their conclusion reflects this uncertainty: Tai Chi may be worth cautious consideration as a low-intensity adjunctive mind-body practice for psychological and cognitive-emotional wellbeing, but neural measures should currently be used to improve study design and hypothesis-generation rather than to guide routine clinical decision-making.
This review suggests that if you're interested in Tai Chi for psychological wellbeing, the emerging evidence on brain correlates is preliminary rather than conclusive. The studies show promise in depression, anxiety, and emotion-related outcomes, but the connection between observed brain changes and psychological improvement remains largely unestablished.
If you practice Tai Chi or are considering it, the practical takeaway is straightforward: any perceived psychological or emotional benefits you experience are worth noting, but shouldn't yet be attributed to specific brain mechanisms identified in research. The evidence is too early-stage for that level of specificity.
The review also highlights that Tai Chi appears to be a low-risk intervention worth exploring as part of a broader approach to psychological wellbeing, particularly if you're in an age group or population represented in the studies (older adults, university students, or those with depression or anxiety). However, this scoping review does not establish Tai Chi as a first-line or replacement treatment for clinical psychological conditions. If you have diagnosed depression, anxiety, or other mental health concerns, evidence-based treatments with stronger causal evidence should remain primary.
Future research should focus on directly testing brain-behavior associations rather than simply reporting parallel changes, standardizing Tai Chi protocols and measurement approaches, and including more diverse populations and longer follow-up periods.
| Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Study type | Systematic scoping review |
| Records identified | 838 |
| Records screened (after deduplication) | 460 |
| Full texts assessed | 25 |
| Studies included | 22 |
| Study designs included | Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparative studies, cross-sectional comparisons |
| Primary populations | Older adults, university students, clinical groups (depression, Parkinson's disease, anxiety) |
| Neural modalities | EEG/event-related potentials, fMRI, functional near-infrared spectroscopy |
| Psychological domains | Depression, anxiety, emotion regulation, cognitive function, fatigue, cognitive-emotional outcomes |
| Journal | Frontiers in Psychology |
| PubMed ID | 42325330 |
| Registration | Open Science Framework (osf.io/fup6c) |
Chai, X., et al. (2026). "Tai Chi, brain activity and psychological outcomes: a systematic scoping review." *Frontiers in Psychology*.
ProtocolEngine provides general health information based on published research. This is not medical advice. Consult a healthcare professional before starting any supplement or health protocol.