FLA is increasingly recognized as not merely a performance-related challenge but also a mental health concern that intersects with educational, cognitive, and emotional domains. Defined as the experience of apprehension and worry specifically related to second language learning, FLA can disrupt learners’ cognitive processing, reduce classroom participation, and impair academic performance [2,6]. From a health psychology standpoint, FLA shares critical affective and physiological characteristics with generalized and social anxiety disorders, including elevated heart rate, intrusive thoughts, avoidance behaviors, and cognitive distortions such as catastrophizing or fear of negative evaluation [3–5]. These parallels highlight the need to address FLA not only as a pedagogical challenge but as an affective disorder requiring psychologically informed interventions.

The antecedents of FLA can be broadly categorized into external (contextual) and internal (personal) factors. Externally, the classroom environment has consistently emerged as a crucial determinant of anxiety levels in language learners. Research has shown that emotionally supportive classroom environments, those characterized by mutual respect, teacher encouragement, and low threat perception, can significantly reduce anxiety and foster positive learner engagement [20–22]. The physical organization of learning spaces, such as flexible seating arrangements that facilitate peer interaction, also contributes to learners’ comfort and perceived psychological safety [23]. Moreover, interpersonal dynamics, including peer relationships and the quality of student-teacher communication, influence learners’ sense of belonging and thus their vulnerability to anxiety [24].

From a psychological health perspective, interventions that enhance the social-emotional climate of the classroom may have downstream effects on anxiety regulation. MBIs, in particular, have been shown to foster prosocial behavior, increase empathy, and reduce interpersonal conflict in educational settings [25,26]. A systematic review by Monsillion et al. [27] further demonstrated that MBIs improve teachers’ self-compassion and perceived efficacy, both of which have been linked to improved classroom environments and more supportive learning conditions, therefore helping to reduce students’ language learning related anxieties. These findings position mindfulness not only as a personal coping tool but also as a systemic factor capable of influencing the psychosocial context in which FLA arises.

On the internal side, FLA is associated with individual learner differences that are psychologically and biologically mediated. Learners’ perceived language competence, their relative standing in class, and dispositional factors such as emotional intelligence, self-regulation, and self-motivation significantly shape anxiety levels [28,29]. Research also points to the importance of psychological resilience, as reflected in traits like grit and willingness to communicate, which may buffer the emotional impact of language learning stressors [30,31]. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have highlighted foreign language self-efficacy as a key construct in this domain, showing a reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and FLA [32]. Learners with higher self-efficacy are more likely to interpret challenges as surmountable and less likely to experience debilitating anxiety.

From a health psychology perspective, this relationship is particularly meaningful because self-efficacy influences not only academic outcomes but also emotional resilience and mental health [33,34]. Mindfulness practices have been found to enhance self-efficacy by increasing metacognitive awareness and emotional stability, both of which allow learners to remain focused and less reactive under stress [35,36]. These findings provide strong theoretical justification for investigating mindfulness as an intervention for FLA, particularly in learning environments where psychological distress is common and performance pressures are high. Yet, despite increasing empirical interest in mindfulness across educational contexts, the specific intersection of mindfulness and FLA has received limited attention in the form of comprehensive or integrative analysis.

Educational and psychological research has developed a range of interventions aimed at mitigating FLA [36,37]. Classroom-based approaches typically focus on modifying environmental and instructional variables to foster a sense of emotional safety. For instance, interventions that emphasize peer collaboration, teacher support, learner autonomy, and positive reinforcement have been associated with reduced anxiety and improved learner confidence [38]. These techniques are often categorized into individual (e.g., self-monitoring, preparation strategies) and interactional (e.g., cooperative learning, teacher-student dialogue) modalities, and aim to cultivate affective conditions conducive to language learning.

In addition to these pedagogical interventions, psychological strategies grounded in positive psychology have gained attention for their potential to reshape learners’ emotional responses. One such approach involves having students recall and reflect on past academic successes, thereby reinforcing self-efficacy and reducing anticipatory anxiety [37]. These affective interventions are aligned with a strengths-based model of mental health, encouraging learners to engage with their experiences from a more empowered and emotionally balanced standpoint.

Existing strategies for addressing FLA typically emphasize specific aspects of the anxiety experience, whether environmental or cognitive in nature. While these approaches may indirectly influence psychophysiological states—for instance, through positive recall of past achievements—MBIs offer a more comprehensive framework by simultaneously engaging multiple response domains. Through mechanisms such as enhanced attentional control, non-judgmental awareness, and physiological downregulation, mindfulness has demonstrated efficacy in reducing generalized, social, and performance-related anxiety in diverse populations [13,15]. In educational settings, MBIs have been shown to lower academic stress, enhance emotional resilience, and support executive functioning—all of which are relevant to the cognitive demands of second language learning [19].

Emerging evidence suggests that mindfulness may be particularly suited to addressing two core drivers of FLA: perfectionistic thinking and fear of negative evaluation [14,39]. By training learners to observe thoughts non-reactively, mindfulness may help reduce rumination and evaluative self-judgment—two processes that heighten vulnerability to language learning anxiety [14]. Furthermore, the physiological benefits of mindfulness—such as reductions in cortisol levels and sympathetic nervous system activation—can support a calmer, more regulated bodily state during performance tasks [11,15]. These findings support the integration of mindfulness not only as a coping strategy but as a holistic, health-promoting intervention that aligns with contemporary models of educational well-being.

Despite these promising developments, few studies have explored the specific role of mindfulness in language learning contexts, and even fewer have focused on its application to FLA. This gap underscores the need for targeted research that evaluates both the effectiveness of MBIs in reducing FLA and the contextual factors that influence their implementation. Such work is essential for advancing our understanding of how evidence-based mental health strategies can be embedded within pedagogical practices to enhance learning outcomes and emotional well-being simultaneously.

Although mindfulness-based approaches have been increasingly adopted to support student mental health and classroom well-being, their specific impact on FLA has yet to be comprehensively reviewed. While existing research offers evidence of mindfulness reducing general anxiety and improving learning-related emotional outcomes, there is limited synthesis regarding its role in the language learning domain. The specific ways mindfulness may reduce FLA, along with practical classroom application difficulties, require further investigation.

This review aims to bridge that gap by systematically synthesizing the empirical literature examining the relationship between mindfulness and FLA. The review encompasses both correlational studies examining the relationships between mindfulness traits and FLA, as well as intervention studies assessing the impact of mindfulness-based programs on FLA among language learners.

To structure this review, two overarching research questions are proposed: 1.

What is the nature of the relationship between mindfulness and FLA among language learners?

To address this question, three competing hypotheses are examined:

Hypothesis 1a: Mindfulness is positively associated with FLA.

Hypothesis 1b: Mindfulness is negatively associated with FLA.

Hypothesis 1c: Mindfulness is indirectly associated with FLA through potential mediating variables. 2.

What are the effects of MBIs on reducing FLA, and how are these effects moderated by cultural, methodological, and implementational factors?

Following PRISMA guidelines (Supplementary Material S1) [1], data were systematically extracted using a standardized form that included study design (correlational/intervention), sample characteristics, mindfulness/FLA measurement tools, and key findings. Concurrently, this systematic review was conducted across multiple academic databases, such as the American Search Complete, ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus. To minimize the publication bias and ensure a comprehensive search, both peer-reviewed studies and dissertations were included, with the research process concluding in November 2023. In the search strategy, relevant keywords were employed: “Mindfulness OR meditation” AND “language anxiety”; “mindful” AND “foreign OR second language”; “language anxiety” AND “meditation”; “mindful” AND “language learning”; and “foreign OR second language” AND “meditation.” Next, no date restrictions were applied during the search.

The outcomes following the search of the American Search Complete database produced 86 titles and abstracts; Eric produced 86 titles and abstracts; Web of Science produced 322 titles and abstracts; and Scopus generated 403 titles and abstracts. After eliminating any duplicates, 346 papers that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria have undergone further evaluation.

We applied specific inclusion criteria after conducting literature searches and screening abstracts, as shown in Fig. 1. First, articles had to be written and published in English. Second, the studies needed to examine the relationship between mindfulness and FLA. Third, studies needed to be empirical research, excluding review studies. The exclusion criteria refer to studies that are not written or published in English, as well as those that discuss mindfulness in contexts unrelated to FLA. Furthermore, we excluded studies that did not include mindfulness or FLA measurements.

Following the application of those criteria, thirteen abstracts were identified, along with one published article [40] derived from the author’s PhD dissertation [41]. After conducting a reference tracing on these 14 papers, we found one more master’s thesis [42] and one more doctoral thesis [43]. Upon re-evaluation during the revision process, we have excluded these two theses for the following methodological reasons. Öz [42] lacked rigorous quality controls in its research design, particularly in measurement validity, which did not meet our updated quality thresholds for inclusion. Del Mar Thomas [43] employed an exceptionally minimal intervention protocol (two 5-min audio-guided sessions) that differed substantially from the more robust interventions (typically 4–12 week programs) examined in other included studies, creating problematic heterogeneity in intervention intensity. Therefore, we ultimately locked in 14 papers. One author carried out the literature search, screening, review, and data collection of articles, and another one repeated it, with disagreements solved thanks to discussions. Due to the limited number of articles and variations in research design, a systematic review was conducted instead of a meta-analysis.

Two authors independently evaluated the methodological quality of included studies based on study design, sample size, confounding control, and outcome measurement. Initial inter-rater agreement was 91% (Cohen’s κ = 0.87, 95% CI 0.82–0.92), and discrepancies were resolved through discussion to reach consensus.

For the subsequent data extraction (e.g., study characteristics, outcomes, and effect estimates), the two reviewers first independently coded a subset of studies (20%) to ensure consistency. Remaining extractions were performed by one reviewer and verified by the second. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion.

The results were systematically tabulated to summarize study characteristics (e.g., design, sample size) and reported outcomes. Given the substantial heterogeneity in study methodologies and outcome measures, a narrative synthesis approach was adopted without statistical meta-analysis. To examine temporal trends in the literature, we additionally created a bar chart visualizing the annual distribution of included studies.

Table 1 presents the general characteristics of the 14 included studies. There is no time constraint in the literature search procedure for acquiring a comprehensive collection of mindfulness-related FLA research across different publication years. All studies examining the correlation between mindfulness and FLA (n = 14) have been conducted during the last seven years (2017–2023). Fig. 2 comprehensively showcases the yearly trends in the number of studies conducted within a particular field or research area. This visual representation provides valuable insights into the evolution of research activity over time, highlighting periods of increased interest and potential areas of emerging significance.

Regarding the research design, 9 out of the 14 studies analyzed in this review utilized correlation tests to examine the relationship between mindfulness and other relevant variables. In addition, 5 studies used mindfulness interventions in the classrooms, demonstrating online guided mindfulness meditation recordings or teacher-led mindfulness exercises as intervention methods. Only 2 studies [40,41] used randomized controlled trials, while the majority of intervention studies employed a quasi-experimental design.

The distribution of the research background includes the United States (n = 3), mainland China (n = 3), Thailand (n = 2), Turkey (n = 1), Iran (n = 2), Iraq (n = 1), Spain (n = 1), and Indonesia (n = 1). Among these 14 studies, the majority of the research background was in Asia (including 9 non-intervention studies and 1 intervention study), with English as the foreign language of the participants. The remaining four studies took place in the United States and Spain. The participants, regardless of their nationality, spoke Spanish, Chinese, and English, with some considering one or more of these languages as foreign to them.

All 14 empirical studies involved a total of 4867 participants. The main focus on college students is evident, with 12 out of 14 studies targeting this population. For the study on adult students, except for Shen [44], who did not provide specific age specifications for participants, the average age of university participants was between 18.3 and 20.979 years old. Choomchaiyo and Varma’s study [45] included a diverse participant pool, spanning ages 18 to 55 and encompassing students, employees, employers, and self-employed individuals. Meanwhile, Mortimore’s [46] research focused solely on elementary school students. The gender distribution is as follows: 59.1% of the population are females, while 30.5% are males. With the exception of Alsharhani et al. [47] and Geng [48], who did not provide information on the gender distribution in their investigations, the remaining 12 studies exhibited a consistent pattern of having a higher number of female participants compared to male participants.

A consistent body of non-intervention research supports a significant negative relationship between trait mindfulness and FLA. All 9 studies included in this review [44,45,47–49,51–54] reported inverse associations between trait mindfulness and various forms of language-related anxiety, including speaking anxiety, classroom anxiety, and reading anxiety. These findings were observed across diverse linguistic, cultural, and instructional contexts, encompassing participants from Iran, Thailand, China, Iraq, Indonesia, and multi-lingual Western educational settings, indicating a high degree of generalizability.

The theoretical explanation for this relationship can be found in the self-regulatory and attentional control functions of mindfulness [12,13]. Mindfulness, characterized by present-focused awareness and a non-reactive orientation, has been shown to modulate the intensity and frequency of anxiety-provoking thoughts and physiological arousal [35,60]. Within the context of language learning, learners high in mindfulness may interpret ambiguous or evaluative classroom situations with greater cognitive flexibility and reduced affective interference. Gao [53] and Fan and Cui [19] further emphasize that mindfulness can lower anxiety indirectly by reducing academic burnout and promoting emotional stability, both of which are relevant to sustained performance in language classrooms.

Importantly, this consistent inverse relationship offers a foundational rationale for the use of mindfulness in educational intervention. Since mindfulness appears to reduce the cognitive and emotional manifestations of FLA, its incorporation into pedagogical practice may help alleviate anxiety without altering curriculum content. Furthermore, mindfulness training may support broader educational objectives by facilitating emotion regulation and attentional stability, skills that are crucial in cognitively demanding environments such as second-language acquisition. Although the overall trend suggests a negative association between mindfulness and FLA, this pattern is not uniformly reflected across all components of mindfulness. Several studies indicate that certain facets may relate to FLA in distinct or even opposing ways, which necessitates a more fine-grained analysis of mindfulness subdimensions.

5 intervention studies investigated the impact of structured mindfulness-based practices on FLA, with mixed empirical outcomes. These studies varied substantially in terms of intervention format, duration, and frequency. 2 studies employed short, audio-guided mindfulness meditations over extended periods, 33 sessions across 13 weeks [40,41], but reported no statistically significant reductions in FLA, despite participants’ positive subjective responses. Similarly, Mortimore [46], using brief daily meditation in a primary school setting over nine weeks, did not observe quantitative improvements in FLA but noted favorable qualitative feedback from teachers and students.

In contrast, Ersanli and Ünal [50] implemented a face-to-face, theme-based mindfulness program (15 min per session, twice weekly for four weeks) and found significant reductions in FLA in both quantitative and qualitative measures. Li et al. [55] also reported statistically significant reductions in anxiety following a structured practice, delivered twice weekly, although specific dosage details were inconsistently reported across sessions.

Overall, interventions involving mindfulness practice yielded inconsistent quantitative results. Only 2 studies [50,55] demonstrated statistically significant anxiety reduction, while the remaining three reported null quantitative effects but observed positive participant perceptions. This divergence suggests that implementation factors, such as delivery mode (face-to-face vs. audio-guided), degree of engagement, and instructional context, may moderate the efficacy of mindfulness training on FLA. These findings highlight the need for more controlled, theory-driven interventions that not only measure quantitative anxiety outcomes but also attend to delivery quality and learner engagement.

This systematic review has several limitations. First, the limited number of randomized controlled trials in existing intervention studies restricts causal conclusions. Future research should employ rigorous RCT designs with active control groups (e.g., relaxation training) to better distinguish mindfulness-specific effects from general intervention benefits. In addition, the predominance of short-term assessments leaves the longitudinal effects of mindfulness on FLA unexamined; sustained benefits and their impact on language learning trajectories remain unknown. Future work should implement follow-up assessments at 6–12-month intervals to examine skill retention and potential sleeper effects on FLA.

The sample characteristics also constrain generalizability. Most participants reviewed under this topic were university students, leaving other age groups and proficiency levels underrepresented. Future researchers may prioritize K-12 populations and beginner-level learners, as these groups may experience FLA more acutely and benefit differently from mindfulness training. Finally, while no adverse effects were reported in the reviewed studies, preliminary evidence suggests mindfulness may cause transient discomfort (e.g., increased tension) [81]. Future interventions should incorporate standardized adverse effect monitoring protocols and assess individual differences in emotional vulnerability that may moderate treatment responses.