Almost Everyone Knows Reiki, Few Know the Research: Reading the 2026 Australian Survey

A new Australian survey reports that 99 percent of respondents had heard of Reiki and 69 percent had tried it — striking numbers that are already being quoted. This is a careful reading of what the survey actually measured, where its numbers can mislead, and what the gap between "knowing the word" and "knowing the practice" looks like from inside a teaching room.

The study, by Sonia Zadro and Peta Stapleton, was published in 2026 in the journal Global Advances in Integrative Medicine and Health. It surveyed 457 people in Australia — 187 community members and 274 health professionals, including nurses, psychologists, massage therapists, and medical practitioners — about their awareness, use, and beliefs around Reiki and energy healing. Below, I go through what the paper says, what it does and doesn't show, and my own take as someone who has practiced and taught in the traditional Usui stream for more than twenty years.

Part 1: What the Source Says

Key Points

• Awareness was near-universal. 99 percent of respondents had heard of Reiki, and 98 percent were aware of energy healing more broadly.
• Reported use was high. 69 percent said they had used Reiki, and 78 percent had used some form of energy healing.
• Knowledge of the research was thin. Only 43 percent were aware that Reiki research exists at all, and the authors classify 73 percent of respondents as holding inaccurate views of the research base — most commonly underestimating it or answering that they had no idea.
• Professions differed sharply. Massage therapists in the sample reported the highest use (100 percent), while medical practitioners used Reiki and energy healing the least. Almost half of the medical professionals (48 percent) believed Reiki "has no research base."
• The authors flag their own limits. Recruitment materials mentioned Reiki explicitly, so people positive about Reiki were more likely to respond — a bias the paper itself acknowledges. Some professional subgroups were small, and 19 percent of respondents did not report gender.

Part 2: What It Does — and Doesn't — Show

The headline numbers are real, but they need careful handling.

Related: A New Survey Asks Who Actually Knows What Reiki Is — and the Honest Answer Is Uncomfortable for Everyone explains this in detail.

The 69 percent figure is not "69 percent of Australians." Because the survey recruited with materials that named Reiki, people already interested in it were more likely to take part. The paper says this plainly, and it matters: this is a snapshot of a Reiki-curious sample, not a national usage rate. If you see the number quoted without that caveat, the quote has gone further than the data.

The awareness finding is on firmer ground. Even allowing for the friendly sample, near-total awareness of the word "Reiki" across community members and five health professions tells you something: the term has fully entered everyday vocabulary in a Western country. That matches other signals — search trends, wellness-industry menus — that I have written about before.

The most interesting finding is the knowledge gap, and it cuts both ways. Fewer than half of respondents knew any Reiki research existed. Some assumed there was none; others simply had no idea either way. In other words, most people's beliefs about the evidence — positive or negative — are not based on the evidence. That applies to the 48 percent of medical professionals who said there is "no research base" (there is one; it is modest and mixed, but it exists) just as much as to enthusiasts who assume science has proven far more than it has.

What the survey cannot tell us: whether Reiki works for anything. It measured awareness, use, and beliefs — not outcomes. A survey like this says "many people in this sample have tried it and most don't know the research"; it says nothing about what a session does. Those are different questions, and mixing them up is how both hype and dismissal get manufactured.

Related: Ten Minutes of Reiki for 1,724 First Responders: What a Big Community Study Does and Doesn't Show explains this in detail.

Part 3: A Grounded Practitioner's Take

Reading this paper felt familiar, because the gap it measures walks into my teaching room every month.

Most people who contact me already "know" Reiki — in the sense the survey measures. They have heard the word, seen it on a spa menu, maybe received a session on holiday. Very few know where the practice comes from, what an attunement actually is, or that a research literature exists with honest, mixed, mostly modest results. Awareness of the word has raced far ahead of understanding of the thing.

I also recognize the two-sided ignorance about evidence. I came to Reiki through a businessman — someone getting real results in the real world, not a "spiritual" type at all — so my own first impression had nothing to do with the mystical image most people carry. Perhaps because of that start, I have never needed Reiki to be scientifically proven to value it, and I have never claimed it treats illness. What I tell students matches what this survey implies most people never hear: research exists; it is limited; relaxation effects are the most consistently reported; and anyone who tells you the science says much more — or that there is no science at all — has not read it.

If nearly everyone has heard of Reiki and most have formed beliefs without information, then the practitioner's job includes being a source of accurate, unexcited information. That is a quieter role than the wellness industry usually advertises. I think it is the more useful one.

Related: Reiki, Mindfulness & Knee Pain: A 2026 Study explains this in detail.

FAQ

Q: Does this survey prove Reiki is effective?

A: No, and it does not try to. It measured awareness, use, and beliefs — not outcomes. Evidence about effects comes from clinical studies, which so far most consistently support modest relaxation-related benefits, not treatment of illness.

Q: Is the 69 percent usage figure reliable?

A: It is a real finding about this sample, but the authors themselves note that recruitment mentioned Reiki, which attracts Reiki-positive respondents. Treat it as "usage among people interested enough to answer a Reiki survey," not a population statistic.

Q: Why would health professionals know so little about Reiki research?

A: Reiki research sits in complementary-medicine journals that most clinicians never need to read, and the literature is small. The result, as the survey shows, is that even professionals often answer from impression rather than familiarity — in both directions.

Q: What should I actually read if I want the evidence picture?

A: Start with a neutral summary such as the NCCIH's Reiki overview, which reflects the honest state of the research: generally safe, not clearly shown effective for any health condition, with relaxation the most commonly reported experience.

The Bottom Line

This survey confirms something practitioners see daily: the word "Reiki" has become almost universally known, while accurate knowledge about the practice — including its modest research base — remains rare, even among health professionals. The number worth remembering is not the 99 percent awareness or the sample's 69 percent usage; it is the 73 percent whose beliefs about the evidence were wrong in one direction or the other. Whatever side of Reiki you approach from, the useful move is the same: replace impressions with the actual, unexciting, worthwhile facts.

Sources & References

• Zadro, S. & Stapleton, P. — Awareness and Use of Reiki, Reiki Research, Energy Healing, and Complementary Medicine amongst Australian Health Professionals and the Community. Global Advances in Integrative Medicine and Health (2026)
• Reiki — National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NIH) — Neutral overview of what the research does and does not show.