Effects of Neurofeedback on the Working Memory of Children with Learning Disorders—An EEG Power-Spectrum Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning disorders (LDs) are diagnosed in children impaired in the academic skills of reading, writing and/or mathematics. Children with LDs usually exhibit a slower resting-state electroencephalogram (EEG), corresponding to a neurodevelopmental lag. Frequently, children with LDs show working memory (WM) impairment, associated with an abnormal task-related EEG with overall slower EEG activity (more delta and theta power, and less gamma activity in posterior sites). These EEG patterns indicate inefficient neural resource management. Neurofeedback (NFB) treatments aimed at normalizing the resting-state EEG of LD children have shown improvements in cognitive-behavioral indices and diminished EEG abnormalities. Given the typical findings of WM impairment in children with LDs, we aimed to explore the effects of an NFB treatment on the WM of children with LDs by analyzing the WM-related EEG power spectrum. EEGs of 18 children (8–11 y.o.) with LDs were recorded, pre- and post-treatment, during performance of a Sternberg-type WM task. Thirty sessions of an NFB treatment (NFB-group, n = 10) or 30 sessions of a placebo-sham treatment (sham-group, n = 8) were administered. We analyzed the before and after treatment group differences for the behavioral performance and the WM-related EEG power spectrum. The NFB group showed faster response times in the WM task post-treatment. They also exhibited a decreased theta power and increased beta and gamma power at the frontal and posterior sites post-treatment. We explain these findings in terms of NFB improving the efficiency of neural resource management, maintenance of memory representations, and improved subvocal memory rehearsal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".