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

J Atten Disord. 2021 Feb;25(3):448-457. doi: 10.1177/1087054718790802. Epub 2018 Aug 6.

Abstract

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.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity*
  • Electroencephalography
  • Humans
  • Learning
  • Neurofeedback*