The Fallacy Of Sham-Controlled Neurofeedback Trials: A Reply To Thibault And Colleagues (2018)

JOURNAL OF ATTENTION DISORDERS(2021)

引用 31|浏览2
暂无评分
摘要
Background: Sham-controlled neurofeedback (NFB) trials consistently find no separation on ADHD outcome measures leading many to conclude that NFB's beneficial effects are due to placebo. Method: We deconstruct the NFB training methodology and findings of six sham-controlled trials that assessed for evidence of learning. Results: All six studies found no evidence NFB subjects learned to self-modulate the targeted electroencephalogram (EEG). Careful analyses revealed these studies' training methodologies were antithetical to the established science of operant conditioning thereby preventing subjects from learning to self-modulate. These findings are in marked contrast to NFB studies whose methodology mirror the best practices of operant conditioning. Conclusion: The premise that NFB's beneficial effects are due to placebo phenomenon is unproven as these studies compared two forms of false-feedback, not operant conditioning of the EEG. Because these studies are highly cited and considered the gold standard in scientific rigor, a reappraisal of the evidence is urgently needed.
更多
查看译文
关键词
operant conditioning, neurofeedback, sham-controlled trials, placebo
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要