Biological Psychology
Research Papers
Showing 6 of 24Increasing Individual Upper Alpha Power by Neurofeedback Improves Cognitive Performance in Human Subjects
The hypothesis was tested of whether neurofeedback training (NFT)—applied in order to increase upper alpha but decrease theta power—is capable of increasing cognitive performance. A mental rotation task was performed before and after upper alpha and theta NFT. Only those subjects who were able to increase their upper alpha power (responders) performed better on mental rotations after NFT. Training success (extent of NFT-induced increase in upper alpha power) was positively correlated with the improvement in cognitive performance. Furthermore, the EEG of NFT responders showed a significant increase in reference upper alpha power (i.e. in a time interval preceding mental rotation). This is in line with studies showing that increased upper alpha power in a prestimulus (reference) interval is related to good cognitive performance.
View Full Paper →The Effectiveness of Neurofeedback and Stimulant Drugs in Treating AD/HD: Part I. Review of Methodological Issues
The paper examines major criticisms of AD/HD (Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder) neurofeedback research using T. R. Rossiter and T. J. La Vaque (1995) as an exemplar and discusses relevant aspects of research methodology. J. Lohr, S. Meunier, L. Parker, and J. P. Kline (2001), D. A. Waschbusch and G. P. Hill (2001), and J. P. Kline, C. N. Brann, and B. R. Loney (2002) criticized Rossiter and La Vaque for (1) using an active treatment control; (2) nonrandom assignment of patients; (3) provision of collateral treatments; (4) using nonstandardized and invalid assessment instruments; (5) providing artifact contaminated EEG feedback; and (6) conducting multiple non-alpha protected t tests. The criticisms, except those related to statistical analysis, are invalid or are not supported as presented by the authors. They are based on the critics' unsubstantiated opinions; require redefining Rossiter and La Vaque as an efficacy rather than an effectiveness study; or reflect a lack of familiarity with the research literature. However, there are broader issues to be considered. Specifically, what research methodology is appropriate for studies evaluating the effectiveness of neurofeedback and who should make that determination? The uncritical acceptance and implementation of models developed for psychotherapy, pharmacology, or medical research is premature and ill-advised. Neurofeedback researchers should develop models that are appropriate to the technology, treatment paradigms, and goals of neurofeedback outcome studies. They need to explain the rationale for their research methodology and defend their choices.
View Full Paper →Neurofeedback Training for a Patient with Thalamic and Cortical Infarctions
One year after a left posterior and thalamic stroke, a 52-year-old male participant was treated with 14 weeks of theta reduction neurofeedback training. Imaging studies revealed left temporal, parietal, occipital, and bilateral thalamic infarctions along the distribution of the posterior cerebral artery. Neuropsychological testing demonstrated severe verbal memory, naming, visual tracking, and fine motor deficits. Additionally, alexia without agraphia was present. A pretraining quantitative electroencephalograph (QEEG) found alpha attenuation, lack of alpha reactivity to eye opening, and excessive theta activity from the left posterior head region. Neurofeedback training to inhibit 4–8 Hz theta activity was conducted for 42 sessions from left hemisphere sites. Over the course of the training, significant reductions in theta amplitude occurred from the training sites as assessed from the postsession baseline periods. Posttraining, a relative normalization of the QEEG was observed from the left posterior head region.
View Full Paper →Neurofeedback Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder in Children: A Comparison with Methylphenidate
Clinical trials have suggested that neurofeedback may be efficient in treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We compared the effects of a 3-month electroencephalographic feedback program providing reinforcement contingent on the production of cortical sensorimotor rhythm (12–15 Hz) and beta1 activity (15–18 Hz) with stimulant medication. Participants were N = 34 children aged 8–12 years, 22 of which were assigned to the neurofeedback group and 12 to the methylphenidate group according to their parents' preference. Both neurofeedback and methylphenidate were associated with improvements on all subscales of the Test of Variables of Attention, and on the speed and accuracy measures of the d2 Attention Endurance Test. Furthermore, behaviors related to the disorder were rated as significantly reduced in both groups by both teachers and parents on the IOWA-Conners Behavior Rating Scale. These findings suggest that neurofeedback was efficient in improving some of the behavioral concomitants of ADHD in children whose parents favored a nonpharmacological treatment.
View Full Paper →On the Pathophysiology of Migraine—Links for “Empirically Based Treatment” with Neurofeedback
Psychophysiological data support the concept that migraine is the result of cortical hypersensitivity, hyperactivity, and a lack of habituation. There is evidence that this is a brain-stem related information processing dysfunction. This cortical activity reflects a periodicity between 2 migraine attacks and it may be due to endogenous or exogenous factors. In the few days preceding the next attack slow cortical potentials are highest and habituation delay experimentally recorded during contingent negative variation is at a maximum. These striking features of slow cortical potentials are predictors of the next attack. The pronounced negativity can be fed back to the patient. The data support the hypothesis that a change in amplitudes of slow cortical potentials is caused by altered habituation during the recording session. This kind of neurofeedback can be characterized as “empirically based” because it improves habituation and it proves to be clinically efficient.
View Full Paper →Neurofeedback—The Significance of Reinforcement and the Search for an Appropriate Strategy for the Success of Self-regulation
Nine healthy children took part in five sessions of feedback and instrumental conditioning of slow cortical potentials (SCPs). The feedback conditions (the relation between the feedback signal and amplitude of SCP) were inverted after two sessions. Neither the children nor the therapists were aware of this change. The adjustment of the children to the new feedback setting and the self-regulation strategies employed were investigated. The results were as follows: (a) Healthy children achieved control over cortical negativity within two sessions. (b) The change of feedback conditions worsened the regulation abilities, which then improved again within the following three sessions. (c) After the first two sessions, the participants were able to describe strategies that were successful during different phases of self-regulation. (d) Following the change in the feedback conditions, the children re-evaluated the way they influenced their SCPs. However, they did not alter the cognitive or behavioral strategies. The study demonstrated that positive and negative reinforcement and the knowledge of results are more important for successful self-regulation than the search for effective strategies. The relevance of these findings is discussed.
View Full Paper →Ready to Optimize Your Brain?
Schedule a free consultation to discuss biological psychology and how neurofeedback training can help
Or call us directly at 855-88-BRAIN
View Programs & Pricing →