ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2018
Differential Subjective Experiences in Learners and Non-learners in Frontal Alpha Neurofeedback: Piloting a Mixed-Method Approach.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurofeedback, Biofeedback, and Basic Learning Theory: Revisiting the 2011 Conceptual Framework.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2026Review
- Controlling Virtual Reality With Brain Signals: State of the Art of Using VR-Based Feedback in Neurofeedback Applications.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2025Review
- Study protocol for a multi-session randomized sham-controlled trial of PCC- and amygdala-targeted neurofeedback for the treatment of PTSD.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Aesthetics, illusion of success and age interactions: disentangling effects in the closed-loop design with sham neurofeedback training.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Do Miniature Eye Movements Affect Neurofeedback Training Performance? A Combined EEG-Eye Tracking Study.Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback · 2024Article
- Interest of neurofeedback training for cognitive performance and risk of brain disorders in the military context.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
- Neurofeedback strategies in binge-eating disorder as predictors of EEG-neurofeedback regulation success.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Neurofeedback and neural self-regulation: a new perspective based on allostasis.Reviews in the neurosciences · 2022Review
- Frontal alpha asymmetry interaction with an experimental story EEG brain-computer interface.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- TSMG: A Deep Learning Framework for Recognizing Human Learning Style Using EEG Signals.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Design and Implementation of an EEG-Based Learning-Style Recognition Mechanism.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Consensus on the reporting and experimental design of clinical and cognitive-behavioural neurofeedback studies (CRED-nf checklist).Brain : a journal of neurology · 2020Article
- Differential Effects of Up- and Down-Regulation of SMR Coherence on EEG Activity and Memory Performance: A Neurofeedback Training Study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
- How Much Do Strategy Reports Tell About the Outcomes of Neurofeedback Training? A Study on the Voluntary Up-Regulation of the Sensorimotor Rhythm.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In a neurofeedback paradigm, trainees learn to willfully control their brain dynamics. How this is realized remains an open question. We evaluate the hypothesis that learning success is associated with a specific phenomenology. To address this proposal, we combined quantitative and qualitative analyses of a short neurofeedback training (NFT) session during which participants enhanced mid-frontal alpha power and were then subsequently interviewed about their experiences. We analyzed the electrophysiological data to determine learning success and classify trainees as learners and non-learners. The subjective experiences differed between the two groups and are best described along a trying-sensing continuum, with non-learners engaging effortfully with the task (e.g., "I will it [the bar] to move") whereas learners reported more sensing of their inner (e.g., "Something inside my stomach") and outer environment (e.g., "I was aware of the sound of the beeps"). In the process of piloting this mixed-method approach, we developed a classification system for the verbal reports. This system provides an explicit analytic framework which might guide future studies that aim to investigate the association between subjective experiences and NFT protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.