4.0 Article

Cognitive training, but not EEG-neurofeedback, improves working memory in healthy volunteers

Journal

BRAIN COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 5, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcad101

Keywords

cognitive training; working memory; neurofeedback training; monetary reward; alpha suppression

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-regulation of alpha frequency through neurofeedback does not improve working memory maintenance. However, changes in right parietal low-beta power are related to improved working memory accuracy. Working memory performance is influenced by motivational factors, which are associated with specific brain activities, including alpha suppression.
Does self-regulation of one's own alpha frequency through neurofeedback improve working memory maintenance? In this study, Barbazzeni et al. found no evidence for neurofeedback-training effects based on a five days training regime. However, changes in right parietal low-beta power over training days were related to improved working memory accuracy. Working memory performance can be influenced by motivational factors, which may be associated with specific brain activities, including suppression of alpha oscillations. We investigated whether providing individuals online feedback about their ongoing oscillations (EEG-neurofeedback) can improve working memory under high and low reward expectancies. We combined working memory training with neurofeedback to enhance alpha suppression in a monetary-rewarded delayed match-to-sample task for visual objects. Along with alpha, we considered the neighbouring theta and beta bands. In a double-blind experiment, individuals were trained over 5 days to suppress alpha power by receiving real-time neurofeedback or control neurofeedback (placebo) in reward and no-reward trials. We investigated (i) whether neurofeedback enhances alpha suppression, (ii) whether monetary reward enhances alpha suppression and working memory, and (iii) whether any performance benefits of neurofeedback-training would transfer to unrelated cognitive tasks. With the same experimental design, we conducted two studies with differing instructions given at the maintenance, yielding together 300 EEG recording sessions. In Study I, participants were engaged in a mental calculation task during maintenance. In Study II, they were instructed to visually rehearse the sample image. Results from Study I demonstrated a significant training and reward-anticipation effect on working memory accuracy and reaction times over 5 days. Neurofeedback and reward anticipation showed effects on theta suppression but not on alpha suppression. Moreover, a cognitive training effect was observed on beta suppression. Thus, neurofeedback-training of alpha was unrelated to working memory performance. Study II replicated the training and reward-anticipation effect on working memory but without any effects of neurofeedback-training on oscillations or working memory. Neither study showed transfer effects of either working memory or neurofeedback-training. A linear mixed-effect model analysis of neurofeedback-independent training-related improvement of working memory combining both studies showed that improved working memory performance was related to oscillatory changes over training days in the encoding and maintenance phases. Improvements in accuracy were related to increasing beta amplitude in reward trials over right parietal electrodes. Improvements in reaction times were related to increases in right parietal theta amplitude during encoding and increased right parietal and decreased left parietal beta amplitudes during maintenance. Thus, while our study provided no evidence that neurofeedback targeting alpha improved the efficacy of working memory training or evidence for transfer, it showed a relationship between training-related changes in parietal beta oscillations during encoding and improvements in accuracy. Right parietal beta oscillations could be an intervention target for improving working memory accuracy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available