The Fallacy of Sham-Controlled Neurofeedback Trials: A Reply to Thibault and Colleagues (2018)

J Atten Disord. 2018 Aug 6;1087054718790802. doi: 10.1177/1087054718790802. Online ahead of print.


Background: Sham-controlled neurofeedback (NFB) trials consistently find no separation on ADHD outcome measures leading many to conclude that NFB's beneficial effects are due to placebo.

Method: We deconstruct the NFB training methodology and findings of six sham-controlled trials that assessed for evidence of learning.

Results: All six studies found no evidence NFB subjects learned to self-modulate the targeted electroencephalogram (EEG). Careful analyses revealed these studies' training methodologies were antithetical to the established science of operant conditioning thereby preventing subjects from learning to self-modulate. These findings are in marked contrast to NFB studies whose methodology mirror the best practices of operant conditioning.

Conclusion: The premise that NFB's beneficial effects are due to placebo phenomenon is unproven as these studies compared two forms of false-feedback, not operant conditioning of the EEG. Because these studies are highly cited and considered the gold standard in scientific rigor, a reappraisal of the evidence is urgently needed.

Keywords: neurofeedback; operant conditioning; placebo; sham-controlled trials.