The covariation of independent and dependant variables in neurofeedback: a proposal framework to identify cognitive processes and brain activity variables

Doubting the double-blind: Introducing a questionnaire for awareness of experimental purposes in neurofeedback studies

Double-blinding subjects to the experiment's purpose is an important standard in neurofeedback studies. However, it is difficult to provide evidence that humans are entirely unaware of certain information. This study used insights from consciousness studies and neurophenomenology to develop a contingency awareness questionnaire for neurofeedback. We assessed whether participants had an awareness of experimental purposes to manipulate their attention and multisensory perception. A subset of subjects (5 out of 20) gained a degree of awareness of experimental purposes as evidenced by their correct guess about the purposes of the experiment to affect their attention and multisensory perceptions specific to their double-blinded group assignment. The results warrant replication before they are applied to clinical neurofeedback studies, given the considerable time taken to perform the questionnaire (∼25 min). We discuss the strengths and limitations of our contingency awareness questionnaire and the growing appeal of the double-blinded standard in clinical neurofeedback studies.

Can neurofeedback provide evidence of direct brain-behavior causality?

Neurofeedback is a procedure that measures brain activity in real-time and presents it as feedback to an individual, thus allowing them to self-regulate brain activity with effects on cognitive processes inferred from behavior. One common argument is that neurofeedback studies can reveal how the measured brain activity causes a particular cognitive process. The causal claim is often made regarding the measured brain activity being manipulated as an independent variable, similar to brain stimulation studies. However, this causal inference is vulnerable to the argument that other upstream brain activities change concurrently and cause changes in the brain activity from which feedback is derived. In this paper, we outline the inference that neurofeedback may causally affect cognition by indirect means. We further argue that researchers should remain open to the idea that the trained brain activity could be part of a "causal network" that collectively affects cognition rather than being necessarily causally primary. This particular inference may provide a better translation of evidence from neurofeedback studies to the rest of neuroscience. We argue that the recent advent of multivariate pattern analysis, when combined with implicit neurofeedback, currently comprises the strongest case for causality. Our perspective is that although the burden of inferring direct causality is difficult, it may be triangulated using a collection of various methods in neuroscience. Finally, we argue that the neurofeedback methodology provides unique advantages compared to other methods for revealing changes in the brain and cognitive processes but that researchers should remain mindful of indirect causal effects.

Towards a Pragmatic Approach to a Psychophysiological Unit of Analysis for Mental and Brain Disorders: An EEG-Copeia for Neurofeedback

This article proposes what we call an "EEG-Copeia" for neurofeedback, like the "Pharmacopeia" for psychopharmacology. This paper proposes to define an "EEG-Copeia" as an organized list of scientifically validated EEG markers, characterized by a specific association with an identified cognitive process, that define a psychophysiological unit of analysis useful for mental or brain disorder evaluation and treatment. A characteristic of EEG neurofeedback for mental and brain disorders is that it targets a EEG markers related to a supposed cognitive process, whereas conventional treatments target clinical manifestations. This could explain why EEG neurofeedback studies encounter difficulty in achieving reproducibility and validation. The present paper suggests that a first step to optimize EEG neurofeedback protocols and future research is to target a valid EEG marker. The specificity of the cognitive skills trained and learned during real time feedback of the EEG marker could be enhanced and both the reliability of neurofeedback training and the therapeutic impact optimized. However, several of the most well-known EEG markers have seldom been applied for neurofeedback. Moreover, we lack a reliable and valid EEG targets library for further RCT to evaluate the efficacy of neurofeedback in mental and brain disorders. With the present manuscript, our aim is to foster dialogues between cognitive neuroscience and EEG neurofeedback according to a psychophysiological perspective. The primary objective of this review was to identify the most robust EEG target. EEG markers linked with one or several clearly identified cognitive-related processes will be identified. The secondary objective was to organize these EEG markers and related cognitive process in a psychophysiological unit of analysis matrix inspired by the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project.

Neurofeedback: Principles, appraisal, and outstanding issues

Neurofeedback is a form of brain training in which subjects are fed back information about some measure of their brain activity which they are instructed to modify in a way thought to be functionally advantageous. Over the last 20 years, neurofeedback has been used to treat various neurological and psychiatric conditions, and to improve cognitive function in various contexts. However, in spite of a growing popularity, neurofeedback protocols typically make (often covert) assumptions on what aspects of brain activity to target, where in the brain to act and how, which have far-reaching implications for the assessment of its potential and efficacy. Here we critically examine some conceptual and methodological issues associated with the way neurofeedback's general objectives and neural targets are defined. The neural mechanisms through which neurofeedback may act at various spatial and temporal scales, and the way its efficacy is appraised are reviewed, and the extent to which neurofeedback may be used to control functional brain activity discussed. Finally, it is proposed that gauging neurofeedback's potential, as well as assessing and improving its efficacy will require better understanding of various fundamental aspects of brain dynamics and a more precise definition of functional brain activity and brain-behaviour relationships.

EEG neurofeedback treatments in children with ADHD: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective: We undertook a meta-analysis of published Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) with semi-active control and sham-NF groups to determine whether Electroencephalogram-neurofeedback (EEG-NF) significantly improves the overall symptoms, inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity dimensions for probably unblinded assessment (parent assessment) and probably blinded assessment (teacher assessment) in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

Data sources: A systematic review identified independent studies that were eligible for inclusion in a random effects meta-analysis.

Data extraction: Effect sizes for ADHD symptoms were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals.

Results: Five identified studies met eligibility criteria, 263 patients with ADHD were included, 146 patients were trained with EEG-NF. On parent assessment (probably unblinded assessment), the overall ADHD score (SMD = −0.49 [−0.74, −0.24]), the inattention score (SMD = −0.46 [−0.76, −0.15]) and the hyperactivity/impulsivity score (SMD = −0.34 [−0.59, −0.09]) were significantly improved in patients receiving EEG-NF compared to controls. On teacher assessment (probably blinded assessment), only the inattention score was significantly improved in patients receiving EEG-NF compared to controls (SMD = −0.30 [−0.58, −0.03]).

Conclusions: This meta-analysis of EEG-NF in children with ADHD highlights improvement in the inattention dimension of ADHD symptoms. Future investigations should pay greater attention to adequately blinded studies and EEG-NF protocols that carefully control the implementation and embedding of training.