methodology
Research Papers
Neurofeedback Training for Social Cognitive Deficits: A Systematic Review
<p><strong>Orndorff and his colleagues [1]</strong> suggested that if a neural activity is considered a treatment variable instead of outcome, it widens the scope of research and has a specific implication for social neuroscience. Given this, the empirical evidence is collected and analyzed where neural activity as self-manipulation design through neurofeedback training specifically for social cognition deficit is done. The objective of the present article is to provide a systematic review of 1) how NFT is utilized to treat social cognitive deficits, 2) how NFT is utilized to target Social Cognition Deficit in ASD, 3) examining the directions, strengths, and quality of evidence to support the use of NFT for ASD. The databases for studies were searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Springer, Science Direct, Psychinfo, and Google Scholar, using combinations of the following keywords: ‘Neurofeedback,’ ‘Autism Spectrum Disorder,’ ‘Mu Rhythm’ and ‘Social Cognition.’ Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were specific to 1) autistic and typically developed population, 2) intervention study, 3) Delivered by NFT, 4) participants showed social cognitive deficit and/or improvement. Total one eighty-seven studies were found of key interest; out of which 17 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. All studies reported the improvement in different domains of social cognition and were moderately methodologically sound. Eleven out of seventeen studies satisfied the trainability and interpretability criteria suggested by <strong>Zoefel and his colleagues [2].</strong> The conclusion from the present review is in line with comments of <strong>Marzbani and colleagues [3]</strong> that, ‘current research does not provide sufficient conclusive results about its efficacy.’ The patterns and directions concluded from studies related to protocol, methodology and results are discussed in detail in the present review.</p>
View Full Paper →Eficacia del neurofeedback para el tratamiento de los trastornos del espectro autista: Una revisión sistemática
Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are characterized by impairments in communication and interaction skills, stereotyped patterns of behavior and restricted interests. They show anomalous electroencephalographic (EEG) patterns that might explain those impairments. Neurofeedback is considered to be a therapeutic alternative for their normalization. The objective was to review the evidence on the efficacy of neurofeedback as a treatment for ASDs. We conducted a systematic review of 17 empirical studies localized thru an exhaustive bibliographic search of the databases PsycInfo, PsycArticles and Pubmed. The results indicate certain efficacy of neurofeedback in the treatment of abnormal EEG patterns and core ASD symptoms, as well as others such as impairments in attention and cognitive functions, anxiety or behavioral disorders. Neurofeedback may be considered a treatment "with modest experimental support" or "probably efficacious" with "controversial support", though more methodologically rigorous studies are needed to determine its therapeutic efficacy with more certainty
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 →Ready to Optimize Your Brain?
Schedule a free consultation to discuss methodology and how neurofeedback training can help
Or call us directly at 855-88-BRAIN
View Programs & Pricing →