Prior Prognostic Expectations as a Potential Predictor in Neurofeedback Training

Yevhen Damanskyy,Stig Hollup,Alexander Olsen

doi:10.1007/s41465-021-00234-3

Abstract

The present study evaluated whether subjects’ expectations and neurofeedback training performance predict neurofeedback efficacy in cognitive training by controlling both factors as statistical variables. Twenty-two psychology students underwent neurofeedback training, employing beta/theta protocol to enhance beta1 power (13–21 Hz) and suppress theta (4–7 Hz) power. Neurofeedback efficacy was evaluated by behavioral components measured on pre-tests and post-tests employing a visual continuous performance task. The results revealed a significant interaction term between change in reaction time from pre-test to post-test and expectancy effect, indicating that participants with high prognostic expectations showed better improvement in reaction time scores. The data did not reveal that actual neurofeedback performance influenced the post-test measurements of the visual continuous performance task. No significant differences were found for reaction time variability, omission, or commission errors. Possible factors contributing to the results are discussed, and directions for future research are suggested.

Highlights

A large body of research appears to confirm the potential benefits of brain training programs (Jaeggi et al, 2014; Lilienthal et al, 2013; Rudebeck et al, 2012; Susanne et al, 2008) and in recent years, the implementation of such programs has significantly advanced
Several studies pointed out on (Arnold et al, 2013; Schabus et al, 2017; van Dongen-Boomsma et al, 2013) implemented a control group in a double-blind placebo design and found that the effectiveness of neurofeedback training was not superior to placebo training, indicating that both conditions were effective. This fact suggests that neurofeedback training, like other brain training programs, faces the problem that underlying mechanisms leading to cognitive improvement are not well understood (Greenwood & Parasuraman, 2015)
The present study aimed to investigate the efficacy of neurofeedback training on sustained attention and determine whether actual neurofeedback training performance or prognostic expectations can predict this efficacy

Summary

Introduction

A large body of research appears to confirm the potential benefits of brain training programs (Jaeggi et al, 2014; Lilienthal et al, 2013; Rudebeck et al, 2012; Susanne et al, 2008) and in recent years, the implementation of such programs has significantly advanced. Many companies are attempting to introduce products to schools and therapy centers with the claim that cognitive performance will improve after a certain number of training sessions, positively affecting performance in academic, social, or professional contexts, and even reducing symptoms associated with various psychological disorders Several studies pointed out on (Arnold et al, 2013; Schabus et al, 2017; van Dongen-Boomsma et al, 2013) implemented a control group in a double-blind placebo design and found that the effectiveness of neurofeedback training was not superior to placebo training, indicating that both conditions were effective This fact suggests that neurofeedback training, like other brain training programs, faces the problem that underlying mechanisms leading to cognitive improvement are not well understood (Greenwood & Parasuraman, 2015). Little is known about the effect of expectations on brain training programs (Rabipour & Davidson, 2015)

Results

Discussion

Conclusion