Author: admin

Author: Len Ochs

All forms of central nervous system dysfunctions include problems
taking in, processing, organizing, and retrieving stimulation. And
all methods of treating such problems — from depression, to the
spectrum of brain injuries, many pain syndromes, movement disorders,
emotional hyper-reactivity (PTSD, etc), hyper-energetic states
(ADD/ADHD), etc., involve stimulation. When, in 1990, I conceived of
feeding back stimulation that was resonant with the EEG — which was
shortly thereafter entertained by Chuck Davis — an entire new field of
neuroscience was opened, one in which there was no experience to draw
upon. In the development of the LENS software, using J&J’s
equipment, there have been many false steps along the way. In
fact, the entire development of the LENS system is grounded in errors
that happened in many dimensions, but which has worked out rather
well — either because of them or in spite of them.

Each stimulation system has its own sets of physiological reactions.
I dropped sound and lights six year ago because all
microprocessor-based systems produce emissions, which, with the
lights, were too intense for patients. When these systems — using
J&J hardware — lessened symptoms with an average average (this is
not a doubling typo, because there are many averages, depending on
the problem treated) treatment duration of 11+ sessions without lights, I never looked
back, and could never see why I would be interested in the
traditional neurofeedback approaches — which I used since 1975. Continue reading “On the Low Energy Neurofeedback System (LENS)”

Author: Lise’ D. DeLong, Ph.D

As a NeuroCognitive Specialist, I have come to realize many of the common characteristics we attribute to ADHD, ADD, and nonspecific learning disabilities are frequently exacerbated by Auditory Processing concerns. Although most of these disorders interface with one another and share many common elements it is important to determine whether the attention difficulties are particularly associated with cognitive, auditory or visual processing deficits.
Therefore, I have found that by using of a variety of Auditory tests I can discern the attention problems more specifically. Current tests, such as Scan-C for children or Scan-A for adolescents and adults, or The Woodcock Test of Auditory Discrimination, are relatively inexpensive and can help pinpoint whether problems with processing the information exist.
The Woodcock Test for Auditory Discrimination looks at whether the individual can discriminate phonemes in the initial, medial or final position, in a quiet or noisy environment.
The Scan-C or Scan-A determines the processing of information using dichotic listening techniques; isolated words in specific ears, figure-ground, competing words in both ears or competing sentences simultaneously.
Another excellent test for a pre & post measurement for neurofeedback is an out of print test called ITPA (Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities). This test is comprised of several subtests, but there are four which I find extremely useful; Auditory Reception, Auditory Association, Auditory Sequential Memory and Auditory Closure. Each of these subtests measures a separate component of listening and attention skills.
Neurofeedback is an useful tool when working with Auditory Disorders. Through my graduate research, I found that after twenty sessions of neurofeedback–coupled with the neurocognitive activities described below–the experimental group had significant gains in Auditory Discrimination in comparison with the control group (DeLong, 2002). Continue reading “Tests for Auditory Processing Disorders”

Author: Alan Bachers, Ph.D.

NeuroCARE Pro (NCP) has been developed by Valdeane and Susan Cheshire Brown at their Zengar Institute in Victoria, British Columbia. This article is my approximation of their concepts, having avoided as long as I could Siegfried’s several requests to put something to paper — or digital medium. Given that this is done at his exhortation I will also take the liberty to burden the reader with an occasional off-topic rant. Conflict of Interest Statement: I make a small part of my living training NCP users.

I have two years experience with NeuroCare Pro. I will compare and contrast it with NeuroCybernetics, with which I have ten years experience, BrainMaster, with which I have five years, and Roshi, with which I now three years experience. This is a purely personal report — others may have vastly different perspectives. Continue reading “Experiences with NeuroCare Pro”

Author: Jonathan D. Cowan, Ph.D., BCIACEEG

A small study done by Marcus Perman and Dr. Artur Pocswardowski at St. Lawrence University compared two protocols on the Peak Achievement Trainer with an untrained control group. This study was designed to test whether they could enhance performance in female undergraduates in just 8 sessions. The primary measurement that was used was the Integrated Visual and Auditory Continuous Performance Test (IVA).

A new protocol, which we have titled Neureka!, because it appears to respond to new and important experiences, produced an improvement of 23.8 in the standard score of the Full Scale Attention Quotient (FAQ) in just four 15-minute sessions. That’s 1.5 standard deviations in an hour of training! By the eighth session, this had dropped off to about one standard deviation (16.4 points) above the initial score.

Continue reading “The Discovery of the Neureka! Protocol”

Author: Victoria Ibric, MD Ph.D

Since 1993, after taking the Neurofeedback course with Siegfried and Sue
Othmer, I became the co-director of the EEG Biofeedback section at the
Biofeedback Institute of Los Angeles, under Dr. Marjorie Toomim’s supervision.
My initial work was with Neurocybernetics (NC) and I reported many successful
outcomes using this instrument. After four years of working in the
Neurofeedback field, I purchased my first ROSHI instrument, developed by
Charles Davis of ROSHI Corp. Now, in my practice, I use both Neurocybernetics
and ROSHI instruments.

I have found the Neurocybernetics system to be very useful for the intake
and for the training of certain patients who are encouraged by rewards and
who are able to stay alert with training. When the NC training reaches a
plateau or the patient becomes frustrated, I switch them to ROSHI. (NC is
hard work for the brain in deficit; and may be very easy and not as effective
with the over-achiever. Over-efforting, which is a frequent problem, can be
tiring and frequently frustrating for a client.) NC training is done with
eyes open. When eyes close due to sleepiness without prompting, training
becomes less efficient. Continue reading “Newsletter from Victoria Ibric, MD Ph.D”

Author: Susan Shor Fehmi, M.S.W.

In recent years the subject of coherence and synchrony has come to the
forefront in neurofeedback circles, leaving people confused about the
difference between the two and wondering whether it is good or bad to have
coherent or synchronous brain waves. As many of you know, Les Fehmi has
been talking about the value of on-off phase synchrony training coupled with
Open Focus training for almost thirty years. This is a training protocol
that makes up a sizeable portion of our Princeton Biofeedback Centre
practice.

Coherence applies to brain waves that maintain a consistent relationship
with each other. Phase synchrony applies to a particular kind of
coherence, one in which brain waves of a specific frequency peak and trough
at the same time. When they peak and trough perfectly in time they are said
to be phase synchronous. Brain synchrony can be trained locally at one site,
or globally over the whole head. Continue reading “Brain Wave Synchrony Training for Individuals and Couples”