Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32918947›Full record

ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2020

Delineating implicit and explicit processes in neurofeedback learning.

Santiago Muñoz-Moldes, Axel Cleeremans

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Online self-evaluation of fMRI-based neurofeedback performance.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  12. Mechanisms of brain self-regulation: psychological factors, mechanistic models and neural substrates.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Unconscious Manipulation of Conceptual Representations with Decoded Neurofeedback Impacts Search Behavior.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Santiago Muñoz-MoldesConsciousness, Cognition and Computation group, Center for Research in Cognition & Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1050 Brussels, Belgium; Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Electronic address: santimz@gmail.com.
Axel CleeremansConsciousness, Cognition and Computation group, Center for Research in Cognition & Neuroscience, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1050 Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: axcleer@ulb.ac.be.
Université Libre de Bruxelles · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurofeedback allows humans to self-regulate neural activity in specific brain regions and is considered a promising tool for psychiatric interventions. Recently, methods have been developed to use neurofeedback implicitly, prompting a theoretical debate on the role of awareness in neurofeedback learning. We offer a critical review of the role of awareness in neurofeedback learning, with a special focus on recently developed neurofeedback paradigms. We detail differences in instructions and propose a fine-grained categorization of tasks based on the degree of involvement of explicit and implicit processes. Finally, we review the methods used to measure awareness in neurofeedback and propose new candidate measures. We conclude that explicit processes cannot be eschewed in most current implicit tasks that have explicit goals, and suggest ways in which awareness could be better measured in the future. Investigating awareness during learning will help understand the learning mechanisms underlying neurofeedback learning and will help shape future tasks.

Indexed as

NeurofeedbackBrainHumansLearningawarenessbiofeedbackconsciousnessdiscriminationlearningmetacognitionneurofeedbackperformance monitoringself-evaluationtraining

Identifiers

PMID32918947
PMCPMC7758707
OpenAlexW3086788163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.