Department of Psychology University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Department of Psychology University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA; Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
Int J Psychophysiol. 2023 Jul;189:42-56. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.04.005. Epub 2023 May 4.
Neurofeedback procedures are attracting increasing attention in the neuroscience community. Based on the principle that participants, through suitable feedback, may learn to affect specific aspects of their brain activity, neurofeedback interventions have been applied to basic research, translational, and clinical science. A large segment of the available empirical research as well as review articles have focused on the extent to which neurofeedback interventions affect mental health outcomes, cognitive capacity, aging, and other complex behaviors. Another segment has aimed to characterize the extent to which neurofeedback affects the targeted neural processes. At this time, there is no current systematic review of the effects of neurofeedback on healthy participants' performance in experimental tasks. Such a review is relevant in this rapidly evolving field because changes in experimental task performance are traditionally considered a hallmark of changing neurocognitive processes, often established in neurotypical individuals. This systematic review addresses this gap in the literature using the PRISMA method, building on earlier reviews on the same topic. Empirical studies using EEG or fMRI to alter brain processes linked to established cognitive and affective laboratory tasks were reviewed. Systematic quality assessment and z-curve analyses were also conducted. Substantial variability was found regarding the study designs used, the implementation of the feedback, and the neural targets of feedback. Importantly, only a minority of the studies reported statistically meaningful effects of neurofeedback on performance in cognitive and affective tasks. The z-curve analyses found no evidence for reporting bias or unsound research practices. Quality control and effect size analyses showed few systematic relations between study characteristics such as sample size or experimental control on the one hand and outcome on the other. Overall, the present study does not support strong effects of NFT on performance in laboratory tasks. Implications for future work are discussed.
神经反馈程序在神经科学界越来越受到关注。基于参与者可以通过适当的反馈来学习影响其大脑活动特定方面的原则，神经反馈干预已被应用于基础研究、转化和临床科学。大量可用的实证研究和综述文章都集中在神经反馈干预对心理健康结果、认知能力、衰老和其他复杂行为的影响程度上。另一部分旨在描述神经反馈对目标神经过程的影响程度。目前，没有关于神经反馈对健康参与者在实验任务中表现影响的系统评价。在这个快速发展的领域，这样的综述是相关的，因为实验任务表现的变化传统上被认为是改变神经认知过程的标志，而这些过程通常在神经典型个体中建立。本系统评价使用 PRISMA 方法，在早期关于同一主题的综述基础上，解决了文献中的这一空白。综述了使用 EEG 或 fMRI 改变与既定认知和情感实验室任务相关的大脑过程的实证研究。还进行了系统的质量评估和 z 曲线分析。关于所使用的研究设计、反馈的实施以及反馈的神经靶点，发现了大量的可变性。重要的是，只有少数研究报告了神经反馈对认知和情感任务表现有统计学意义的影响。z 曲线分析没有发现报告偏倚或不良研究实践的证据。质量控制和效应量分析表明，研究特征（如样本量或实验控制）与结果之间没有系统的关系。总体而言，本研究不支持 NFT 在实验室任务表现上的强烈影响。讨论了对未来工作的影响。
