What's New in Neurofeedback

STOP, look away, and write down all the words you can recall.

Now go back to the list and count how many words you correctly recalled. Good! This is the number for the NO DELAY recall condition. Write down somewhere "NO DELAY = #" where # is the number of words correctly recalled. Now cover over the words you just wrote down so you cannot see them and we will run through the 30 SECOND DELAY condition. Please read the next list of words, but after reading them, stare at a clock for 30 seconds. Only after a delay of 30 seconds may you write down all the words you can recall and do not rehearse the words during the delay... think about the numbers on the clock instead. Use your computer clock if you must. So ready.... go ahead and read List 2, below:

STOP, look at the clock for 30 seconds, thinking about numbers...

Okay, now write down all the words you can recall.

Now go back to the list and count how many words you correctly recalled. Good! This is the number for the 30 SECOND DELAY condition. Write "DELAY = #" where # is the number of words recalled. Compare this number to the NO DELAY condition. Most people will have more words recalled in the 30 SECOND DELAY condition at this point, which we might interpret as meaning that it is better to wait some time before recalling information than immediately recalling the words. That would be a plausible conclusion....

And of course it would be wrong. As the experimenter I manipulated the DELAY variable (NONE vs SOME) and believed that this was the only variable producing change in the results but there is a problem with this experiment as implemented, what we call a confounding variable. There was another variable that changed during the experiment, which was EXPOSURE to the words. By using the same list twice I accidentally manipulated the EXPOSURE variable (NONE vs SOME) and this manipulation could explain the results. I need to revise my conclusion -- maybe it's delay that leads to better recall but maybe it's previous exposure that leads to better recall. To go back to my original intent of the experiment -- the effect of delay on recall-- I need to manipulate only delay and keep exposure the same for two lists or conditions.

Let me rectify this situation by running through another 30 SECOND DELAY condition, but with a new set of words so that the EXPOSURE variable will be held constant (NONE for the 1st list, NONE for this new list). So, again, I want you to read the next list of words, and after reading stare at a clock for 30 seconds, thinking about the numbers only, no rehearsing the words in your mind. After 30 seconds, please write down all the words you can recall on a blank section of paper. So ready.... go ahead and read List 3, below:

STOP, look at the clock for 30 seconds...

Okay, now write down all the words you can recall.

Now go back to the list and count how many words you correctly recalled. Good! This is the number for the 30 SECOND DELAY condition. Compare this number to the NO DELAY condition from List 1.

Most people will STILL have more words recalled in this 30 SECOND DELAY condition compared to NO DELAY, so we can interpret this to mean that it is better to wait some time before recalling recently encoded words than to recall them immediately.... our conclusion is again.... INVALID!...

As the experimenter I continue to believe that I am manipulating the DELAY variable (NONE vs SOME) but I introduced a new confounding variable with this new list. The words in the original list were unrelated, but the 3rd list had RELATED words, where one word triggers the rest (e.g., north, south, east, west). In other words I accidentally manipulated a RELATEDNESS variable (NONE vs SOME) and this could readily explain the results, so instead of my conclusion that delay leads to better recall, it's more likely that related words are easier to recall than unrelated words.

Here, let's try one more time to get this right. We'll use the 3rd list results (RELATED, 30 SECOND DELAY) and we will compare it to the next list of words which will be RELATED, NO DELAY. So read the list below and immediately after reading, do not delay but immediately write down all you can recall. Ready.... now go ahead and read List 4, below:

STOP, look away, and write down all the words you can recall.

Now go back to the list and count how many words you correctly recalled. This is now the number for the NO DELAY recall condition. Please compare this number to the number from List 3.... and you will see once again the DELAY condition led to better recall (unless you're a freak of nature). I manipulated RELATEDNESS in both lists, but the form of RELATEDNESS was not the same. List 3 were ASSOCIATED terms, and List 4 were related by all being the same part of speech (i.e., prepositions) -- not the same thing! So you see how an experimenter must control for all factors and manipulate only one variable to draw proper conclusions. If we let other variables creep in, we cannot be sure of our conclusions.

We never did show that NO DELAY is better than DELAY.

In an experiment we have a number of variables. The independent variable (IV) is the variable, or circumstance, or factor manipulated by the researcher, and we measure the dependent variable (DV). The DV is expected to change as a result of the researcher’s manipulation: it "depends on IV," thus its name. We also have control variables (CV) which are all factors or circumstances that are kept constant across the conditions of the experiment. In our recall experiment, list length was kept constant at 12 words and thus was a control variable, unmanipulated and always the same. Another control variable was language of the words (i.e., English), and other factors such as the setting (i.e., you read the list in the same room, same seat, same computer screen, presumably). We cannot always keep everything constant and controlled so we also have random variables (RV) which are those factors allowed to vary randomly which we hope will even out across individuals and conditions. For instance, in this experiment, each list was read at a slightly different time of day, minutes apart, but we assume time of day is an RV and that it will not significantly influence the results. Other RVS include fatigue in reading, changes in motivation, lighting or room conditions that might have varied slightly. Had you read the first list at noon, and the 2nd at midnight, then instead of time of day being an RV it might be a confounding variable, a variable whose levels covary with IV conditions and may be responsible for changes. In our experiment the EXPOSURE, RELATEDNESS, and FORM OF RELATEDNESS were all confounding variables, likely responsible for the change in the DV more than the IV (delay or not).

Proper experiments allow us to make conclusions about causality. If we keep variables and groups constant or equivalent and change only one factor at a time, we should be able to make conclusions about a variable on behavior.

Science is a set of rules to keep us from lying to each other and to ourselves. Whenever we spend time investigating the state of the world, we are invested and we use the scientific method to ensure we do not blind ourselves to the truth. The scientific method is an approach to evaluate ideas objectively, with degree of confidence, and comes down to a set of rules on how to collect, summarize, and analyze data. We have to be aware of all the variables involved and consider as many possible confounding variables as we can to make our conclusions about the state of the world (here, the effect of delay on recall).

If we think X occurs because of Y, we might not notice that X occurs whenever Z happens and Z causes Y to occur often. We often infuse causation into correlation, assuming one action causes another when they are merely associated with each other. For instance, in New York City, it is a well-known fact that ice cream sales are correlated with the homicide rate. Is it the case that the sugar in ice cream drives people to murder or do murderers finish their evil and then head off to Baskin Robbins afterwards? This is a silly example of what is called the "third variable problem," a hidden variable that causes both variables to change together in like fashion. In New York City, summer heat increases ice cream sales and the homicide rate increases during summer for a number of reasons. Environmental heat is the 3rd variable causally altering the other two.

Scientific progress is achieved incrementally, building on the shoulders of giants and the industrious. Science is about sharing, which is difficult in today's age of patent rights and stock options for scientific enterprise. In fact one reason neurofeedback has been slow to penetrate the psyche of the mass market is the lack of dollars generated by investment protection through patenting. Lack of protection means lack of investment. If I spend my dollars investing or advertising my scientific product and anyone in the field can take advantage of this expenditure, my return for the dollar is minimal. Because we build on the work of others, we need to be as honest as we possibly can in our presentation of data and results. We can only build on a firm foundation, not sand. We have entered an age in neuroimaging of vast sharing of data. Every few months a new fMRI data-sharing center opens up, and I suspect the same may become true for normative EEG when institutional support increases. These databases will bring about an understanding of the brain we have yet to imagine, one which will benefit neurotherapy immensely, as we discern what exactly goes awry in anxiety, depression, autism, and an assortment of mental disorders. But to use these databases, we rely on the honesty and reputation of its participants and this will be especially true as the data becomes more complex and uncertain. To rephrase it, "science is nothing more than a system of rules to keep us from lying to each other,” Ken Norris, dolphin researcher.

-DK

Reviews NEW &/OR USEFUL BOOKS - Focus on Mind/Body

The Evolution of Consciousness: The Origins of the Way We Think
Robert Ornstein
Examination of the evolution of the mind, how we are adaptive and not rational; Darwin over Freud.

Mapping the Mind
Rita Carter, Christopher Frith
An exploration of the modularity of brain function, with useful graphics.

The Secular Mind
Robert Coles
A autobiographically-flavored treatise on the replacement of religion by science in Western intellectual culture.

The Mind's I
Douglas R. Hofstadter
Some call this classic a cosmic journey of the mind, in terms of self and self-consciousness.

Unsnarling the World-Knot: Consciousness, Freedom, and the Mind-Body Problem


The Enigma of the Mind: The Mind-Body Problem in Contemporary Thought


Mind in a Physical World: An Essays on the Mind-Body Problem and Mental Causation


Cognitive Science and the Mind-Body Problem


The Body/Body Problem: Selected Essays

Massimini M, Tononi G, Huber R. (2009). Slow waves, synaptic plasticity and information processing: insights from transcranial magnetic stimulation and high-density EEG experiments European Journal of Neuroscience, 29,1761-70.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to induce NREM-like slow waves in the cerebral cortex.

Meynier C, Burle B, Possamaï CA, Vidal F, Hasbroucq T.(2009). Neural inhibition and interhemispheric connections in two-choice reaction time: A Laplacian ERP study. Psychophysiology. Apr 8.
Motoric inhibition is implemented in a feedforward manner between cortical zones controlling different response alternatives.

Perry A, Bentin S.(2009). Mirror activity in the human brain while observing hand movements Brain Research, Jun 3.
Mu suppression was larger contralateral to a moving hand and larger when hands grasped different objects in different ways than when movement was repetitive.

Schienle A, Schäfer A.(2009). In search of specificity: functional MRI in the study of emotional experience. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73,22-6.
Advocates co-registration of fMRI and EEG to study emotion-specific brain activation.

Schinkel S, Marwan N, Kurths J.(2009). Brain signal analysis based on recurrences. Journal of Physiol Paris. Jun 12.
Another attempt to improve quantitative analysis of human EEG, a complex nonstationary signal.

Schmidt B, Hanslmayr S.(2009). Resting frontal EEG alpha-asymmetry predicts the evaluation of affective musical stimuli. Neurosci Lett. Jun 7.
Resting frontal alpha-asymmetry reflected affective response to music.

Slater R, Worley A, Fabrizi L, Roberts S, Meek J, Boyd S, Fitzgerald M.(2009). Evoked potentials generated by noxious stimulation in the human infant brain. European Journal of Pain. May 28.
Authors use ERP to verify that newborn infants are capable of the sensory-discriminative aspects of pain.

Statler KD, Scheerlinck P, Pouliot W, Hamilton M, White HS, Dudek FE.(2009). A potential model of pediatric posttraumatic epilepsy. Epilepsy Research, Jun 9.
Late seizures after TBI are uncommon (in an animal model) but EEG spiking is common.

Thai NJ, Longe O, Rippon G.(2009). Disconnected brains: what is the role of fMRI in connectivity research? International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73,27-32.
Discusses how fMRI has been used to study cortical connectivity in autistic spectrum disorders and how other techniques such as EEG may address the limitations of fMRI in assessing brain connectivity.

Vardi Y, Sprecher E, Gruenwald I, Yarnitsky D, Gartman I, Granovsky Y.(2009). The P300 Event-Related Potential Technique for Libido Assessment in Women with Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder. Journal of Sex Medicine, Apr 23.
The p300 ERP was used for libido assessment in sexually dysfunctional women.

Willand M, Rudner R, Olejarczyk E, Wartak M, Marciniak R, Stasiowski M, Byrczek T, Jalowiecki P.(2009). Fractal dimension--a new EEG-based method of assessing the depth of anaesthesia. Anestezjol Intens Ter. 2008 Oct-Dec;40,166-71.
Fractality reflects depth of anaesthesia similar to the BIS.

Wu D, Li CY, Yao DZ.(2009). Scale-free music of the brain. PLoS One. 4,e5915.
EEG rhythms of different mental states of the brain were converted to sound.

Zanon M, Busan P, Monti F, Pizzolato G, Battaglini PP.(2009). Cortical Connections Between Dorsal and Ventral Visual Streams in Humans: Evidence by TMS/EEG Co-Registration. Brain Topogr. Jun 5.
This group uses simultaneous recording of EEG during the application of TMS to map brain connectivity.

Zyss T.(2009). May depression be a form of epilepsy? Some remarks on the bioelectric nature of depression. Medical Hypotheses. May 28.
The author suggests an overlap of seizure disturbances with depressive disorders.

Although current trends may seem positive, negative attitudes towards mental health have not changed dramatically in recent years. For instance a survey from a few years ago reported that

The definition of abnormality is something to consider. There is no sufficient or necessary element for abnormality, except that the more of the following criteria, the more likely we would call one's behavior abnormal.

Of course there are hazards of defining abnormality with the above. When society goes mad, the sane appear insane. Resistance to social norms and reformers ahead of their time are often classified as abnormal. For instance, using the above criteria, Jesus of Nazareth, Saint Paul, and other religious figures would be classified as abnormal by their fellow first-century peasant peers. Gandhi's nonviolent resistance of British colonialism meets at least 4 of these criteria as well, at least in the short term. People who pierce themselves for entertainment are also classifiable as abnormal, although some make a living at it as performance artists.