Most of the time, the difference between first and second place in competitions does not come down to talent, it hinges instead on mental chatter. The individuals who can quiet the chatter in their mind (us amateurs know it well-that “please don’t let me mess this up” thought that often comes right before actually messing up) are way more likely to win against equally talented competitors who aren’t as adept at quieting the mind. Psychologist and researcher Mihály Csíkszentmihályi called it getting into a state of flow.

Neurofeedback is an excellent way to calm the body, resulting in the mind quieting itself and allowing the body to get into that zone of flow that lets people to do what they’ve trained to do, and an increasing number of athletes know this. Back in 2006, most of Italy’s World Cup-winning soccer team prepped for their challenge by participating in neurofeedback training.  Later, India won its first-ever gold medal in part as a result of their athlete using neurofeedback. And, the Canadian winter Olympic team also used the tool as they prepared to take home the gold as hosts of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic games. Professional athletes of all walks, most notably baseball and football players, have joined the pursuit of a better brain.

This article is a couple of years old now, but it tells the tale of a White Sox pitcher who used neurofeedback to improve his game.

The great part about all the examples of famous athletes who are benefiting from using neurofeedback training is that it shows us that each of us can improve our respective game, whether it’s excelling in school, work, sports, or even at home. It’s a universally powerful tool for those who are willing to commit the time to make it happen.

If you’re interested in relaxing your body so you can quiet your mind, give me a call.

Before most people contact me, they’ve worked hard to acquire some information on neurofeedback. Some quiz friends or colleagues about their previous experiences with neurofeedback. A few speak with a therapist or physician for guidance. Most, though, spend at least some time researching on the internet to learn as much as they can before they meet with me for a consultation.

As a result of the variety of approaches to getting started, I am never quite sure what kinds of questions people will ask when we meet for the first time. I expect questions about how neurofeedback works, both technically and logistically. I expect questions about whether I think my tools can help the person achieve their goals. I expect questions about timing and cost.

I am often surprised, though, by the people who have done just enough research online to think they know what they’re talking about when they ask me if I use a certain tool or a certain EEG amplifier.  They are seeking what they think is the best form of neurofeedback.

Usually, such individuals think they’re doing due diligence, but their questions are usually off the mark.  Here’s why.

Many clinics or practitioners advertise themselves as practicing the only truly effective, truly scientific, or truly cutting-edge form of the art.  Such claims can be convincing and can be a good magnet to attract people, but they are untrue.

Any honest practitioner will tell you that pretty much every form of neurofeedback works at least some of the time. Claiming exclusivity in tools or technique is simply that—opinion.

I will admit that even the forms of neurofeedback I don’t like because I think they involve a one-size-fits-all technique, use false numeric precision (kind of like saying the room air temperature is 72.54968 degrees—it may be true, but does it matter?), or use unvalidated methods actually do work well for a some people.

In fact, I have had the good fortune to witness phenomenal results from a practitioner who was using equipment that was from the 1970s.  It was humbling to see clunky old gear used in such amazing ways.

This experience taught me that the argument of what is best is quite often beside the point, because the best neurofeedback does not necessarily come from using the best tool.

Far more important is having the right practitioner.  The right practitioners know how to use their tool and use it well. They’ve studied hard and continue to learn. They don’t dabble in neurofeedback while actually doing something else the majority of their work day. Even if they’re new at it, they can be excellent if they are humble and seek guidance and supervision from more experienced practitioners.

The best neurofeedback trainers also know how to interact with their clients and connect with them in ways that accelerate the process.  Top-notch brain trainers don’t subscribe to a medical model of cramming in as many trainees into as short of a time span as possible during their work day, thereby resulting in clients who don’t receive the kind of attention and care they deserve. The best practitioners pay attention during brain training sessions to ensure nothing is going amiss, because sometimes people pull leads loose, have cap connections go dry, or need their settings adjusted.

So, finding the best practitioner isn’t about discerning the best technology or tool. It’s about the person. May you find the best person for you.

Neurofeedback performed on subjects who had recovered from major depressive disorder resulted in an improvement in self-esteem, according to a study published in the journal Neuroimage: Clinical and summarized in EurekAlert, a publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Their results were measured using fMRI scans and were a “proof of concept” experiment.  The study was important not just for the improvements in self-esteem that the researchers found, but because it shows difference in brain wiring as a result of neurofeedback training.

You can read the original study here and the EurekAlert summary here.

Keep in mind that fMRI is expensive and used in research. Actual neurofeedback practitioners almost never have fMRI at their disposal.

As in any field, it is important to keep up-to-date with what is happening in the world of neurofeedback. I found the opinions expressed by one of the more famous names in the field during a recent podcast to be interesting and worth sharing. If you, too, are interested in the science of what neurofeedback strives to achieve, follow this link to a conversastion with Jay Gunkelman, who has been reading and interpreting EEG measurements since the 1970s.

Now in semi-retirement, Jay points out things to listeners that us practitioners know well.  For example, he laments the fact that neurofeedback is more broadly known, more greatly accepted, and more researched overseas than in North America.  In addition, he points out the invalidity of the DSM (DSM stands for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and is what mental health care providers use to diagnose their patients and clients) and remarks upon how the DSM has little relationship to what is happening in the brain itself.  He talks about how, despite this invalidity, many institutions fight strongly against moving from symptom descriptions to brain function as a means of diagnosis. He also provides an entertaining history of the field.

Despite not being a neurofeedback practitioner himself, he is worth a listen.

The hour-long interview isn’t for everyone. It has some technical language and terminology that many will find boring. Not me, though. I appreciate learning from those who paved the way for us. And, I know several of my current and former clients will also want to hear what he has to say.

Again, you can find the podcast here.