Learning theory principles that contribute to details of application for the most effective neurofeedback training program will be presented. It has been established that many learning theory principles (classical conditioning, shaping, generalization, etc) are involved in the application known as neurofeedback. This talk is aimed to elaborate on the learning theory principles involved in the effective application of neurofeedback. Additionally, this talk provides the current evidence supporting the use of neurofeedback in the treatment of ADHD and recommendations on the implementation of neurofeedback in clinical practice.
The talk is based upon the recent Position Paper on Neurofeedback for the Treatment of ADHD (Sherlin, Arns, Lubar & Sokhadze, 2010) adopted by the ISNR and also provides basic information regarding the diagnosis and psychophysiological etiology of ADHD. The purpose is to demonstrate the rationale and to reference the necessary support for neurofeedback in order to be recognized as a legitimate, scientific, and evidence-based intervention for the treatment of ADHD.
Sherlin, L, Arns, M, Lubar, J and Sokhadze, E. (2010). ‘A Position Paper on Neurofeedback for the Treatment of ADHD’, Journal of Neurotherapy, 14: 2, 66 — 78
In the 1990s Prof. Yuri Kropotov started his research in the field of quantitative EEG and evoked potentials in normal subjects, in ADHD population and in neurological patients to whom intracranial electrodes were implanted for diagnosis and therapy.
Since the first reports of neurofeedback treatment in ADHD in 1976 many studies have been carried out investigating the effects of neurofeedback on different symptoms of ADHD such as inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity. This technique is also used by many practitioners, but the question as to the evidence-based level of this treatment is still unclear.
Phenotype evaluation of the EEG was proposed in a paper in 2005 published in Clinical Electroencephalography and Neurophysiology. The retrospective analysis of many decades of experience has since been actively evaluated, from published works focusing on basic neuroscience (J. Pop-Jordanov), and the work from Holland on medication response prediction (M. Arns).
Professor Yuri Kropotov demonstrates that by knowing which brain dysfunction is associated with symptoms of ADHD a clinician can suggest the individualised treatment, whether it be medication, neurofeedback, tDCS or GABA agonists.
This paper is an exploration of the theoretical grounds of resilience and hope. In our previous work with women who mother children with ADHD or ASD we found that many women are themselves disabled by their child's disability; they are isolateresild, marginalised and silenced (Carpenter & emerald 2009; Carpenter & Austin 2007). Yet, these women persevere in the face of the ongoing challenges of mothering a child with a disability. We now ask: is this resilience they show, or hope or is it something else again?
There has been an abundance of ADHD neurofeedback (NF) studies in the past decade in an effort to show NF’s efficacy on reducing the cardinal symptoms of ADHD. A recent meta-analysis concluded that NF was an efficacious treatment of ADHD, with a large effect size for inattention and impulsivity and a medium effect size for hyperactivity. Most studies, including the ones in the meta-analysis, have used a wait-list or active control as comparison groups. More recently, there have been a few NF studies using a blinded placebo-controlled design. These studies have shown equivocal results, indicating NF and placebo NF produced similar outcomes.