Journal of American college health : J of ACH · 2026
Comparative efficacy of neurofeedback and traditional mindfulness meditation on undergraduates' stress and mindfulness: A randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jahani Shiva, Haberlin Steve, Carter William, Bradshaw Terrie
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigated the comparative efficacy of two active mindfulness interventions, neurofeedback-assisted meditation and traditional guided meditation.
METHODS: A total of 137 undergraduates were recruited and randomly assigned to one of three, 8-week conditions: neurofeedback meditation (n = 51), traditional meditation (n = 46), or a passive control group (n = 40). Participants completed a single post-intervention assessment to measure mindfulness (MAAS) and perceived stress (PSS-10). Qualitative data (n = 21) were also collected from the neurofeedback group to determine acceptability.
RESULTS: One-Way ANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences between the three groups on post-intervention mindfulness scores, F(2, 134) = 0.423, p = 0.656 or for perceived stress scores F(2, 134) = 0.269, p = 0.765.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the 8-week intervention, regardless of the method, was ineffective in producing statistically meaningful group differences. While acceptability was high, the inclusion of consumer-grade neurofeedback provided no measurable advantage over traditional guided meditation.
METHODS: A total of 137 undergraduates were recruited and randomly assigned to one of three, 8-week conditions: neurofeedback meditation (n = 51), traditional meditation (n = 46), or a passive control group (n = 40). Participants completed a single post-intervention assessment to measure mindfulness (MAAS) and perceived stress (PSS-10). Qualitative data (n = 21) were also collected from the neurofeedback group to determine acceptability.
RESULTS: One-Way ANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences between the three groups on post-intervention mindfulness scores, F(2, 134) = 0.423, p = 0.656 or for perceived stress scores F(2, 134) = 0.269, p = 0.765.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the 8-week intervention, regardless of the method, was ineffective in producing statistically meaningful group differences. While acceptability was high, the inclusion of consumer-grade neurofeedback provided no measurable advantage over traditional guided meditation.