In working with neurofeedback we find that clinical realities quickly outrun our models. What’s worse, our changing conceptions are not always couched in new terminology that firmly ensconces the new realities and delineates the departure from the past. Sometimes we merely alter our view of words that we have used all along, and must continue to use. And it can also happen that our conceptions are changing beneath our formal awareness.
This is what may have been happening with the central term of our field, self-regulation. I was startled to read the other day a post in which Cory Hammond proposed that “self-regulation be taken out of the definition of neurofeedback.” In its place he would emphasize the processes of learning and conditioning. Traditional self-regulation he saw as connected more with peripheral biofeedback, where one is much more consciously engaged, and where the concept of “voluntary controls” (Menninger) is much more applicable. Continue reading “The Self in Self-Regulation”
The new pIR3 is a passive infrared sensor device for biofeedback. Three infrared sensors are mounted in the plastic housing that sits on the forehead and is attached with an adjustable band around the head. Since we are looking at signals from left, right and center, it is important to place the device appropriately so that the label is right side up and the cable extends from the right side of the device. The infrared sensors are not in contact with the forehead, but are held at some distance away so they can measure heat that is radiated from the head. It is important to seat the housing securely (stably) just above the eyebrows. If any hair falls between the forehead and sensors, the signal will be diminished and also more variable, so care must be taken to move any hair out of the way.
It was my hope that the Biofeedback Society of California Annual Conference would offer a favorable climate for the cross-fertilization between peripheral and EEG biofeedback that now badly needs to occur. In actual fact, the rather large program made for considerable fragmentation and splintering of the audience, as nearly everyone gravitated to their own traditional priorities. Tribalism won out again, an opportunity lost. Sue and I were almost the only ones who actually addressed the main topic of evidence-based practice, but nevertheless our audience was mainly neurofeedback people.