Jon Frederick
Mechanisms of learning in physiological self-regulation, esp. the role of explicit processing or attention. How does awareness interact with control of physiological states?
Address: Murfreesboro, Tennessee, United States
Address: Murfreesboro, Tennessee, United States
less
InterestsView All (9)
Uploads
Papers by Jon Frederick
often suggested that this relationship is important for the mechanism of action of biofeedback. This pilot study
examined 6 participants given seven sessions of alpha discrimination training combined with standard
neurofeedback “control” training. Four subjects achieved five criterion (binomial p < .05) sessions in the
discrimination task. The discrimination task performances correlated significantly with performance in the
amplitude control task. Evidence that some subjects can use the intertrial interval (ITI) to predict the correct
responses in the discrimination task led to an examination of how ITIs were distributed with respect to success
(correct or incorrect) and type of trial (same or different from previous) in these and 40 additional subjects from
archival data (Frederick, 2012). This analysis found that some information about the correct responses was
conveyed by the ITI, but participants made relatively little use of this information. However, the criterion
discrimination sessions showed dramatic changes in the distribution of ITIs in the present (but not the archival)
study, suggesting that participants were controlling their electroencephalogram (EEG) during these sessions.
These findings provide preliminary evidence of generalization of skills between these two tasks.
often suggested that this relationship is important for the mechanism of action of biofeedback. This pilot study
examined 6 participants given seven sessions of alpha discrimination training combined with standard
neurofeedback “control” training. Four subjects achieved five criterion (binomial p < .05) sessions in the
discrimination task. The discrimination task performances correlated significantly with performance in the
amplitude control task. Evidence that some subjects can use the intertrial interval (ITI) to predict the correct
responses in the discrimination task led to an examination of how ITIs were distributed with respect to success
(correct or incorrect) and type of trial (same or different from previous) in these and 40 additional subjects from
archival data (Frederick, 2012). This analysis found that some information about the correct responses was
conveyed by the ITI, but participants made relatively little use of this information. However, the criterion
discrimination sessions showed dramatic changes in the distribution of ITIs in the present (but not the archival)
study, suggesting that participants were controlling their electroencephalogram (EEG) during these sessions.
These findings provide preliminary evidence of generalization of skills between these two tasks.