Anticipatory or visualized NF training?

[Guest guest]

Recently, while trying to get a baseline of more than one minute, I

was amazed to find that theta dropped dramatically (my training goal)

*before* feedback began! Yesterday I experimented with this. In the

first two minutes, I got good reduction without any feedback, and

after that, for about 10 minutes, I just watched the BReview screen

(i.e. averaged results by the minute). The results on the graph were

just as good as all but the best sessions with active feedback,

although the effect seemed to eventually wear off, maybe the brain

realized we weren't going to be doing " NF " after all? During that

time, I decided to add to the anticipation by visualizing (EO) the

TrendGraph screen, with the blue line staying low and not surging. I

donft thing the drop in theta was only caused by reduced movement,

because delta did not drop dramatically. My brain seems to know what

is expected of it in these sessions, and can produce the effect on

its own.

Have others noticed an anticipatory effect like this?

I am just letting my mind wander here, but it seems to me that, if it

occurs commonly, this phenomenon has various implications.

For example, a baseline taken at the start of a session would not be

accurate if the brain is already getting geared up for the session.

Thi sin turn might mean that the feedback training is being more

effective than is shown on the results grpah (because the session

starts, in anticipation, before the feedback starts, so the graph

shows a session that is already in progress at the start of

recording.

An anticipatory effect would also confounding observations, based on

baselines, about change in brainwave patterns from session to

session. That is, a trainee may appear to have an improving baseline

brainwave pattern, when in reality, he may just be getting better at

producing that pattern in anticipation of a session. On the other

hand, that would mean that the brain is getting better at modifying

its behavior without feedback, which would be the desired outcome, if

the aim is to teach the brain a greater range of modes of operation.

But I am wondering if this effect cannot be leveraged in some way.

Fore xample, has anyone tried using visualizing sessions between real

sessions, for example, visualizing playing a feedback game and doing

well, as a way of getting extra gtrainingh between sessions, that

is, of deepening the new brainwave habits by repetition? At the

least, visualizing a session could be useful in any situation when

particular calming and/or focusing is required. This would not be

unlike visualizing relaxing on a beach when one is over-stressed.

Perhaps other cues to simulate a real session could be used. For

example, if a Flextrode is used, the trainee could put on a simple

Velcro strip to make it more realistic. Come to think of it, why not

got the whole hog and have the same " feedback " e.g. game on the home

computer, running automatically, with the trainee imagining he is

controlling the game as in a real session?

Of course it would be hard to test the effectiveness of such non-

feedback sessions directly, since the trainee is not actually wired

up. Positive effects would have to be judged from external outcomes.

It might be useful for trainees or parents anxious to see results,

even just from the piont of view of feeling there is something they

can do to improve things.

There, I have finished my creative wandering. Was it of any interest

to anyone?

Geoff

[Guest guest]

Geoff,

Yes, I have used visualization to induce an effect I received in

NFB. A lot of times I wake up at about 4 AM and now I just cue to

SMR or Alpha and I go right back to sleep == not really doing NFB --

it works great!

>

> Recently, while trying to get a baseline of more than one minute, I

> was amazed to find that theta dropped dramatically (my training

goal)

> *before* feedback began! Yesterday I experimented with this. In the

> first two minutes, I got good reduction without any feedback, and

> after that, for about 10 minutes, I just watched the BReview screen

> (i.e. averaged results by the minute). The results on the graph

were

> just as good as all but the best sessions with active feedback,

> although the effect seemed to eventually wear off, maybe the brain

> realized we weren't going to be doing " NF " after all? During that

> time, I decided to add to the anticipation by visualizing (EO) the

> TrendGraph screen, with the blue line staying low and not surging.

I

> donft thing the drop in theta was only caused by reduced movement,

> because delta did not drop dramatically. My brain seems to know

what

> is expected of it in these sessions, and can produce the effect on

> its own.

>

> Have others noticed an anticipatory effect like this?

>

> I am just letting my mind wander here, but it seems to me that, if

it

> occurs commonly, this phenomenon has various implications.

>

> For example, a baseline taken at the start of a session would not

be

> accurate if the brain is already getting geared up for the session.

> Thi sin turn might mean that the feedback training is being more

> effective than is shown on the results grpah (because the session

> starts, in anticipation, before the feedback starts, so the graph

> shows a session that is already in progress at the start of

> recording.

>

> An anticipatory effect would also confounding observations, based

on

> baselines, about change in brainwave patterns from session to

> session. That is, a trainee may appear to have an improving

baseline

> brainwave pattern, when in reality, he may just be getting better

at

> producing that pattern in anticipation of a session. On the other

> hand, that would mean that the brain is getting better at modifying

> its behavior without feedback, which would be the desired outcome,

if

> the aim is to teach the brain a greater range of modes of operation.

>

>

> But I am wondering if this effect cannot be leveraged in some way.

>

> Fore xample, has anyone tried using visualizing sessions between

real

> sessions, for example, visualizing playing a feedback game and

doing

> well, as a way of getting extra gtrainingh between sessions, that

> is, of deepening the new brainwave habits by repetition? At the

> least, visualizing a session could be useful in any situation when

> particular calming and/or focusing is required. This would not be

> unlike visualizing relaxing on a beach when one is over-stressed.

>

> Perhaps other cues to simulate a real session could be used. For

> example, if a Flextrode is used, the trainee could put on a simple

> Velcro strip to make it more realistic. Come to think of it, why

not

> got the whole hog and have the same " feedback " e.g. game on the

home

> computer, running automatically, with the trainee imagining he is

> controlling the game as in a real session?

>

> Of course it would be hard to test the effectiveness of such non-

> feedback sessions directly, since the trainee is not actually wired

> up. Positive effects would have to be judged from external

outcomes.

> It might be useful for trainees or parents anxious to see results,

> even just from the piont of view of feeling there is something they

> can do to improve things.

>

> There, I have finished my creative wandering. Was it of any

interest

> to anyone?

>

> Geoff

[Guest guest]

Geoff,

Long ago when I had my offices in Atlanta, we used equipment that had a tendency from time to time to go south. Of course that never happens any more... One day a young man and his mother came for his session, and, despite our best efforts, the trainer and I could NOT get the machine to work at all. I was about to send them home after explaining to the mother what had happened, but when we went into the training room the client was sitting quietly in front of a blank screen (monitor was turned off), leads on his head, both he and the trainer staring intently at it. We went back into the waiting room and hung around for about half an hour until they came out. The kid was very pleased with himself. The trainer had told him that he thought the boy might be ready to try invisible neurofeedback. He had done a number of sessions. He had an experience of what he felt like when he was scoring. So, the trainer told him, just look at the screen and make the computer (which was turned off) beep. The kid did. They took their usual breaks and discussed how many points the kid had gotten in each training segment, etc. All the usual stuff.

The mother reported later that the client had shown good response to the "session", and the kid had learned that it was he, not the computer, who was making this stuff happen. It helped him generalize the effect.

I don't think I'd have high hopes for being able to get those kinds of results if I started with "invisible" feedback, but it sure makes sense to have the client make the connection that paying attention--whether to a beeping screen or just to a display or just to being there--is what makes the brain change in the desired direction.

Pete

Anticipatory or visualized NF training?

Recently, while trying to get a baseline of more than one minute, I was amazed to find that theta dropped dramatically (my training goal) *before* feedback began! Yesterday I experimented with this. In the first two minutes, I got good reduction without any feedback, and after that, for about 10 minutes, I just watched the BReview screen (i.e. averaged results by the minute). The results on the graph were just as good as all but the best sessions with active feedback, although the effect seemed to eventually wear off, maybe the brain realized we weren't going to be doing "NF" after all? During that time, I decided to add to the anticipation by visualizing (EO) the TrendGraph screen, with the blue line staying low and not surging. I donft thing the drop in theta was only caused by reduced movement, because delta did not drop dramatically. My brain seems to know what is expected of it in these sessions, and can produce the effect on its own. Have others noticed an anticipatory effect like this? I am just letting my mind wander here, but it seems to me that, if it occurs commonly, this phenomenon has various implications. For example, a baseline taken at the start of a session would not be accurate if the brain is already getting geared up for the session. Thi sin turn might mean that the feedback training is being more effective than is shown on the results grpah (because the session starts, in anticipation, before the feedback starts, so the graph shows a session that is already in progress at the start of recording. An anticipatory effect would also confounding observations, based on baselines, about change in brainwave patterns from session to session. That is, a trainee may appear to have an improving baseline brainwave pattern, when in reality, he may just be getting better at producing that pattern in anticipation of a session. On the other hand, that would mean that the brain is getting better at modifying its behavior without feedback, which would be the desired outcome, if the aim is to teach the brain a greater range of modes of operation.But I am wondering if this effect cannot be leveraged in some way. Fore xample, has anyone tried using visualizing sessions between real sessions, for example, visualizing playing a feedback game and doing well, as a way of getting extra gtrainingh between sessions, that is, of deepening the new brainwave habits by repetition? At the least, visualizing a session could be useful in any situation when particular calming and/or focusing is required. This would not be unlike visualizing relaxing on a beach when one is over-stressed.Perhaps other cues to simulate a real session could be used. For example, if a Flextrode is used, the trainee could put on a simple Velcro strip to make it more realistic. Come to think of it, why not got the whole hog and have the same "feedback" e.g. game on the home computer, running automatically, with the trainee imagining he is controlling the game as in a real session? Of course it would be hard to test the effectiveness of such non-feedback sessions directly, since the trainee is not actually wired up. Positive effects would have to be judged from external outcomes. It might be useful for trainees or parents anxious to see results, even just from the piont of view of feeling there is something they can do to improve things.There, I have finished my creative wandering. Was it of any interest to anyone?Geoff