META SPIRITUALITY · 7 DAYS · ONLINE
The Relationships & Well-Being Protocol
Stop working on the relationship. Change the one who is in it.
Seven days online, tested in a randomized, pre-registered trial of 1,002 people. Satisfaction with the closest relationship tripled, irritability collapsed, and every gain was still there at follow-up.
Nobody in the room changed.
And the room changed.
WHAT THIS IS
You cannot repair a relationship from inside the self that is struggling in it.
Communication techniques, boundary work and couples advice all ask the same person to behave better with the same nervous system, the same fears and the same need to be seen a certain way. It works for a while, and then the old reaction arrives faster than the technique does.
This training does something else. For seven days it takes apart the identity that experiences other people as a threat, a source of supply or a disappointment, and what follows is not better behaviour but a different person in the conversation. The people around you did not attend, and their relationship with you changed anyway.
Seven days of the training, self-paced, starting the day you enrol.
The same instruments used in the trial, before and after.
Access for as long as the training runs.
One payment. Nothing to renew.
7 days · online
The Relationships & Well-Being Protocol
$700
Pay now and begin today. The training is self-paced and starts whenever you do.
WHY IT IS UNLIKE COUPLES WORK
Your partner never has to attend.
Every other approach to a difficult relationship needs two willing people, a shared calendar and a great deal of talking about the problem. This one needs you, seven days, and no negotiation with anybody.
Seven days. Starts the day you enrol.
One person changes and the relationship follows
The reaction goes, not just the behaviour
It holds
Almost everyone moved
Seven days, at your own pace
Satisfaction with the closest relationship rose while the other person did nothing differently, because what changed was who was meeting them.
Irritability, defensiveness and the need to be right fell away instead of being managed, which is why nothing had to be remembered in the middle of an argument.
Every outcome was measured again at follow-up, and the gains had held or grown rather than fading the way a good conversation does.
Between seventy-nine and eighty-eight per cent of participants improved on each measure, against roughly half of the control group, most of whom drifted.
No counselling schedule, no weekly appointments and no waiting for a start date. You begin the day you enrol and work through it in the hours you have.
They did not learn to argue better.
They stopped needing to.
WHO THIS IS FOR
For the person who has already tried talking about it.
For anyone living beside somebody they love and cannot reach, or carrying an irritation that arrives before the sentence is finished, or holding a marriage together with technique. It is also for people whose relationships look fine from outside and feel like work from inside.
Self-paced. You begin the day you enrol.
It asks nothing of the other person. They do not need to agree, participate, or even know that you are doing it.
THE TRIAL
Seven days, measured against a control group.
One thousand and two people were randomly assigned either to the training or to a waitlist, in a pre-registered trial with three measurement points: before, immediately after, and again at follow-up. Attrition was 7.4% in the training group and 3.8% in the control group.
3×
Satisfaction with the closest relationship
the share of people satisfied rose from 19.6% to 62.2%
Relationship Assessment Scale
88%
Of participants improved
on negative emotion, against 56% of the control group
Between 79% and 88% across all five outcomes
+39%
Wellbeing
WHO-5, day-to-day flourishing
Controlled d = 0.88
+46%
“I wake up feeling fresh and rested”
the single largest-moving question in the whole study
Not an abstraction. A morning.
−36%
Negative emotions
distress, anxiety, anger, shame
Controlled d = 0.93
+51%
Waking up rested, at follow-up
it was +46% on the last day of the training and higher again weeks later
Every outcome held or kept rising
Outcome | Before | After | Follow-up | Control after | Controlled d | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wellbeing | 48.2 | 67.1 | 69 | 53.3 | 0.88 | p < 10^-16 |
Negative emotions | 25.5 | 16.3 | 16.4 | 22.7 | 0.93 | p < 10^-16 |
Relationship satisfaction | 20.8 | 25.3 | 25.6 | 21.9 | 0.78 | p < 10^-16 |
Positive emotions | 29.2 | 36.3 | 36.8 | 30.9 | 0.85 | p < 10^-16 |
Self-efficacy | 27.6 | 32 | 32.5 | 28.5 | 0.72 | p < 10^-16 |
HOW MANY PEOPLE IT WORKED FOR
Nearly nine in ten improved. In the control group, roughly half drifted.
Averages hide the individual. This is the count of how many people moved, and how many moved far enough to clear the threshold for reliable change, which is the stricter standard used in clinical work.
Outcome | Improved | Reliably changed | Control improved | Control reliable |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Negative emotions | 88% | 39% | 56% | 7% |
Relationship satisfaction | 87% | 39% | 50% | 4% |
Wellbeing | 85% | 40% | 50% | 6% |
Positive emotions | 84% | 33% | 51% | 5% |
Self-efficacy | 79% | 31% | 45% | 3% |
The gap in the last two columns is the clearest single thing in this study. Roughly four in ten people in the training crossed the reliable-change threshold, against three to seven in a hundred of the people who simply waited.
The best sentence anyone has written to you about this training. Ideally one where the change appears in someone else’s behaviour toward them.
M.K. · Trial participant
ITEM BY ITEM
What actually changed in an ordinary day.
Every scale is built from individual questions. These are the largest shifts in the training group from before to after, which is what a percentage looks like up close.
In the relationship
+31%
+28%
+27%
+27%
+19%
The single largest-moving question in the entire study was whether people woke up feeling rested. And then it kept going
Everyone was measured a third time, weeks after the training had finished. Every wellbeing question had risen further in the meantime, which is the opposite of what happens when a good week wears off.
Question | End of the training | At follow-up |
|---|---|---|
I wake up feeling fresh and rested | +46% | +51% |
My daily life is filled with things that interest me | +43% | +47% |
I feel calm and relaxed | +40% | +44% |
I feel active and energetic | +37% | +41% |
I feel cheerful and in good spirits | +31% | +34% |
How satisfied are you with your relationship
How many problems are in your relationship
How well does it meet your expectations
How close to ideal is your relationship
How well does your partner meet your needs
In the person
+46%
+43%
+40%
−39%
−38%
I wake up feeling fresh and rested
My daily life is filled with things that interest me
I feel calm and relaxed
Irritable
Nervous
[Their own words, three to five lines. The strongest ones describe something the other person did differently.]
— M.K.
TRIAL PARTICIPANT
[Two lines.
Short quotes break up the long ones.]
— A.R.
TRIAL PARTICIPANT
[From someone who had done ayahuasca or years of meditation and can compare the two directly. This one is worth hunting for.]
— D.V.
TRIAL PARTICIPANT
FROM PARTICIPANTS
What people said when the seven days were over.
[From someone who arrived sceptical, or who had already tried several of the approaches in the table above.]
— E.S.
TRIAL PARTICIPANT
[From the follow-up. Someone saying it held carries more weight than anything else on this page.]
— L.T.
ONE MONTH LATER
[End on the one that sounds least like a testimonial and most like an ordinary person describing their week.]
— N.B.
TRIAL PARTICIPANT
HOW IT RUNS
Seven days, online, one group moving together.
START
Any day of the year. There are no cohorts and no waiting list, so you begin the moment you enrol.
●
DURATION
Seven days, the same length as the training that produced every result on this page.
PACE
Self-paced, built for people with jobs, children and full lives. You set the hours.
●
●
FORMAT
[Live sessions, recordings, or both, with the daily time commitment stated plainly.]
YOUR PARTNER
Not required, not involved, and not informed unless you choose to tell them.
●
Measurement
You take the same instruments the trial used, before you begin and again at the end.
●
●
BEFORE YOU DECIDE
The questions people ask first
Whenever you do. The training is self-paced with no cohorts and no start dates, so you can enrol tonight and begin tonight, and the seven days do not have to be perfectly consecutive if life gets in the way.
No. Everyone in the trial did this alone, and the relationship measure moved anyway. What changed was the person answering the questions, and the relationship changed around that.
The training is not built around a partner. Wellbeing, emotion and self-efficacy all improved alongside the relationship measure, and the same shift applies to family, colleagues and friendships.
Counselling works on the exchange between two people, which requires both of them and a great deal of talking about the problem. This works on the identity that is having the difficulty, which requires seven days and nobody else's agreement.
It is short. That is what the trial found and it is the reason the trial was run. A thousand people were measured before, immediately after, and again at follow-up, against a randomly assigned group who waited, and the difference between the two groups is what you see here.
Every outcome was measured a third time at follow-up. All five had held, and wellbeing, relationship satisfaction, positive emotion and self-efficacy had continued to rise after the training ended.
No. The training is educational. It is not medical care or psychotherapy, it does not replace either, and it is not intended to diagnose or treat any condition. If you are in crisis or under the care of a clinician, talk to them before you change anything about your treatment.
Results vary from person to person, and a group result is never a promise to an individual. What can be said honestly is that between seventy-nine and eighty-eight per cent of participants improved on each measure, and that the people who waited mostly did not.
[State the daily commitment plainly here. More people decide on this answer than on any other.]
Seven days from now, the same house can feel like a different house.
BEGIN
Begin today, and be done in seven days.
Seven days, online, at your own pace, starting the moment you enrol. Nobody else has to agree to it, and nothing has to be discussed with anyone before you begin.
Seven days of the training, self-paced, starting the day you enrol.
The same instruments used in the trial, before and after.
Access for as long as the training runs.
One payment. Nothing to renew.
7 days · online
The Relationships & Well-Being Protocol
$700
Pay now and begin today. The training is self-paced and starts whenever you do.
About effect size.
Cohen’s d is the standard measure of how strong a result is. Antidepressants land around 0.3 and a full course of psychotherapy around 0.5 to 0.8, where 0.8 is already labelled large. The effects here run from 0.72 to 0.93 after adjusting for baseline.
Scale note.
RAS here is the Relationship Assessment Scale, which measures relationship satisfaction, and not the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Individual results vary, and a group result is never a promise of an individual outcome.
Method note.
1,002 participants (501 in each arm) were randomly assigned to the seven-day training or to a waitlist control, and the trial was pre-registered before data collection began. Outcomes were assessed before, immediately after, and at follow-up. Effect sizes are Cohen’s d, and the controlled d is the ANCOVA between-group estimate adjusting for baseline. Within-group percentages describe the training group’s change from before to after. The control group drifted upward slightly on its own, which is why the baseline-adjusted effect sizes are lower than the raw change percentages suggest, and that is the expected and honest pattern for a waitlist design.
On the responder counts.
Improved means any change in the beneficial direction. Reliable change means a shift large enough to exceed measurement error, computed with the Reliable Change Index at a threshold of 1.96 and an assumed test-retest reliability of .80.
Sources.
Verkoeyen 2026, Meta Spirituality Trial 2, N = 1,002, randomized and pre-registered.
On the tripling figure.
The threefold rise is in the share of participants who reported being satisfied with their closest relationship, from 19.6% to 62.2%, taken from the item-level analysis. The average score on the same scale rose by 21%, from 20.8 to 25.3, with a controlled effect size of 0.78.
A paradigm for ending suffering at the level of identity, tested in four randomized controlled trials.
Meta Spirituality Institute LLC · USA
Programs, books and facilitator certification.
Meta Spirituality Foundation Inc. · Nonprofit
Research, trials and public programs.
IMPORTANT NOTICE
Meta Spirituality programs, books and protocols are educational and are not medical care, psychotherapy or a substitute for either. They are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any condition. If you are in crisis or under the care of a clinician, please speak with a qualified professional before making changes to your treatment.
© 2026 Meta Spirituality Institute LLC. Meta Spirituality® and the Meta Self® are registered trademarks. All rights reserved.
PROGRAMS
The Meta Self
The Process
Anxiety Protocol
Relationships Protocol
Meta Self Scale
RESEARCH & RESULTS
The trials are carried out by Meta Spirituality Foundation Inc., the nonprofit, and reported in full in the linked preprints. Meta Spirituality Institute LLC delivers the paid programs and the facilitator certification. Individual results vary, and outcomes reported for a group are not a promise of an outcome for any one person.
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
Refund Policy
Disclaimer
ORGANIZATION
Research & trials
The Institute
Get certified
The Foundation
About Nina
CONNECT
Contact
FAQ
Telegram channel
Podcast
Press & media