Neurofeedback and Consciousness Training: Using Technology to Accelerate the Ancient Path

Language: en

The Shortcut Through the Mountain

A Tibetan Buddhist monk sits in a Himalayan cave for 20 years, meditating 8 hours a day, accumulating 50,000 hours of practice. At the end of those 20 years, Richard Davidson places EEG sensors on his head and records the highest-amplitude gamma synchrony ever measured in a human brain — a neural signature of integrated, compassionate awareness that no untrained brain has ever produced.

In a clinic in Los Angeles, a software engineer sits in a comfortable chair with EEG sensors on her head. A computer screen displays a slowly changing landscape — mountains, rivers, shifting colors — that responds in real time to her brainwave patterns. When her brain produces more gamma, the landscape brightens. When gamma drops, it dims. After 40 sessions of 30 minutes each — 20 hours total — her baseline gamma has increased measurably. She reports a subjective experience of greater clarity, presence, and emotional equilibrium.

Twenty years in a cave. Twenty hours in a chair. Different timescales, different methods, same direction. This is the promise and the provocation of neurofeedback — the use of real-time EEG feedback to train specific patterns of brain activity that correspond to specific states of consciousness.

Neurofeedback does not replace meditation. A map is not the territory, and a biofeedback signal is not enlightenment. But neurofeedback can do something that no amount of verbal instruction can do: it can show you, in real time, what your brain is doing, and reward you when it does the right thing. It closes the feedback loop between intention and brain state. And in doing so, it accelerates — sometimes dramatically — the process of learning to shift your own consciousness.

The History: From Cat Brains to Human Consciousness

Neurofeedback was born from a lucky accident in a cat laboratory.

Barry Sterman and the Seizure-Resistant Cats

In the mid-1960s, Barry Sterman, a neuroscientist at UCLA, was studying sleep cycles in cats. He trained cats to increase a specific EEG rhythm — a 12-15 Hz oscillation over the sensorimotor cortex that he named the sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) — using operant conditioning. When the cats produced SMR, they received a food reward.

The cats learned quickly. Within a few weeks of training, they could reliably increase SMR production on command.

Separately, Sterman was conducting a study for the U.S. Air Force on the toxic effects of monomethylhydrazine (a rocket fuel component) on the nervous system. He exposed a group of cats to the substance, expecting all of them to develop seizures — the known toxic effect.

Most did. But some cats were mysteriously resistant to the seizures. When Sterman checked which cats these were, he made a startling discovery: the seizure-resistant cats were the same cats he had previously trained to increase SMR.

The neurofeedback training had, as an unintended side effect, made their brains more resistant to seizure-inducing chemicals. The SMR training had apparently strengthened the brain’s inhibitory circuits — the same circuits that prevent the runaway excitation that produces seizures.

This accidental finding launched the field of neurofeedback. If training a specific brainwave pattern could change brain function so profoundly in cats, what could it do in humans?

Joe Kamiya and Alpha Training

Around the same time, psychologist Joe Kamiya at the University of Chicago was conducting the first human neurofeedback experiments. Kamiya discovered that people could learn to control their alpha brainwave production (8-13 Hz) when given real-time auditory feedback.

Subjects lay in a dark room with EEG electrodes on their scalp. A tone sounded when their brain produced alpha waves and fell silent when alpha dropped. Within a few sessions, most subjects could increase or suppress alpha at will.

More importantly, subjects reported that the alpha state had a distinctive subjective quality — a calm, centered, pleasantly detached awareness that experienced meditators recognized immediately as similar to the state they cultivated through meditation.

Kamiya published his findings in 1968 in Psychology Today, and the article generated enormous public interest. The idea that you could “train” meditation-like states through technology captivated the imagination — and concern — of both the scientific and spiritual communities.

How Neurofeedback Works: The Engineering of Consciousness

The basic architecture of a neurofeedback system is a closed-loop feedback control system — the same architecture used in engineering for everything from thermostats to aircraft autopilots.

The Feedback Loop

1. Sensor. EEG electrodes on the scalp detect the brain’s electrical activity. Depending on the protocol, 1-19 electrode sites may be used. The raw EEG signal is amplified and digitized.

2. Signal processing. The digitized EEG is processed in real time by software that extracts the frequency components of interest. For example, if the protocol targets gamma (30-42 Hz), the software uses Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) or bandpass filtering to extract the gamma-band power at each electrode site.

3. Feedback generation. The extracted signal drives a feedback display — visual (screen brightness, animation, video), auditory (tones, music volume), or both. When the brain produces the target pattern, the feedback is rewarding (the screen brightens, the music plays, the game character advances). When the brain drifts away from the target, the feedback diminishes.

4. Learning. The brain, seeking the reward, gradually learns to produce the target pattern more frequently, with greater amplitude, and with greater consistency. This is operant conditioning applied to brain electrical activity — the same learning mechanism that governs all voluntary behavior.

5. Consolidation. Over multiple sessions (typically 20-40 sessions of 30-45 minutes each), the trained pattern becomes the brain’s default. The effects persist after training ends, often for months or years.

Why It Works

The brain’s extraordinary capacity for neurofeedback learning is a consequence of its fundamental nature as a self-organizing, plasticity-capable system. Key mechanisms include:

Hebbian learning. “Neurons that fire together wire together.” When neurofeedback rewards a specific pattern of neural activity, the synaptic connections supporting that pattern are strengthened through long-term potentiation (LTP). Over many repetitions, the pattern becomes easier to produce and more stable.

Thalamocortical loops. Many of the frequencies targeted by neurofeedback (alpha, SMR, beta, gamma) are generated by resonant loops between the thalamus and cortex. Neurofeedback can shift the operating parameters of these loops, changing the brain’s default oscillatory mode.

Default mode modulation. Many neurofeedback protocols effectively train the brain to shift out of its default mode (the resting, self-referential, often ruminating pattern associated with the default mode network) and into task-positive, externally focused, or meditative modes. This is directly analogous to what meditation training does — but with the advantage of real-time objective feedback.

Autonomic regulation. Because the brain controls the autonomic nervous system, changes in brain activity patterns produced by neurofeedback cascade downstream to affect heart rate variability, blood pressure, immune function, hormonal balance, and other autonomic variables. Neurofeedback is, indirectly, a form of autonomic training.

Major Neurofeedback Protocols for Consciousness Training

Alpha Training (8-13 Hz)

Goal: Increase alpha production, particularly in posterior (occipital-parietal) regions.

Mechanism: Alpha represents the brain’s “idling” state — relaxed but alert, internally focused but not ruminating. Training alpha increases the capacity for calm awareness, reduces stress reactivity, and provides the foundation for deeper meditative states.

Clinical evidence: Alpha training has been studied for anxiety, stress, insomnia, and mild depression. Meta-analyses show moderate effect sizes for anxiety reduction. Subjects consistently report increased calm, reduced mental chatter, and improved sleep quality.

Consciousness application: Alpha is the gateway frequency for meditation. Increasing alpha production teaches the brain to “let go” of the analytical, problem-solving mode (beta) and settle into the receptive, present-moment awareness that all meditation traditions cultivate as a foundation.

SMR Training (12-15 Hz)

Goal: Increase sensorimotor rhythm at the central electrode sites (C3, Cz, C4).

Mechanism: SMR represents the sensorimotor cortex in an “idle” state — ready for action but not actively engaged in movement. High SMR is associated with physical stillness, mental calm, and focused attention.

Clinical evidence: SMR training is the most extensively studied neurofeedback protocol for ADHD. Meta-analyses show effect sizes comparable to medication for inattention symptoms. It has also been used for seizure disorders (following Sterman’s original discovery), insomnia, and anxiety.

Consciousness application: SMR training teaches the body-brain interface to be still and stable — the same quality that yogic traditions call sthira (steadiness). It is the neurophysiological foundation for the ability to sit in meditation without fidgeting, to maintain physical stillness while the mind deepens.

Alpha-Theta Training (8-13 Hz / 4-8 Hz)

Goal: Sequentially increase alpha, then theta, producing a deep trance-like state while maintaining sufficient alpha to prevent sleep.

Mechanism: This protocol trains the “crossover” — the moment when theta amplitude exceeds alpha amplitude, indicating a shift from relaxed waking (alpha-dominant) into a hypnagogic, trance-like state (theta-dominant) while remaining conscious. This crossover state is the same state accessed through shamanic drumming, deep meditation, and hypnosis.

Clinical evidence: The Peniston-Kulkosky protocol (alpha-theta training for alcoholism) produced the most dramatic results in the early neurofeedback literature. In their original study (1989), 80% of the neurofeedback group remained abstinent at 3-year follow-up, compared to 0% of the control group. Subsequent studies have confirmed the protocol’s efficacy for substance abuse and PTSD.

Consciousness application: Alpha-theta training is the closest neurofeedback comes to directly training the shamanic state of consciousness. The theta-dominant, alpha-supported state it cultivates is the state in which the boundaries of the ordinary self become permeable — dreams, visions, memories, and transpersonal experiences arise spontaneously. The Peniston-Kulkosky results suggest that this state has extraordinary healing power, particularly for trauma and addiction — conditions that shamanic traditions treat through precisely this type of consciousness shift.

Beta Training (15-20 Hz)

Goal: Increase low-to-mid beta activity, typically at frontal sites.

Mechanism: Beta training increases the brain’s capacity for focused, sustained attention. It strengthens the prefrontal cortex’s ability to maintain executive control over behavior and cognition.

Clinical evidence: Beta training is used for ADHD (often in combination with SMR), traumatic brain injury, and cognitive decline. Studies show improvements in attention, processing speed, and executive function.

Consciousness application: While less obviously related to meditation than alpha or theta training, beta training strengthens the capacity for what Zen traditions call “joriki” — the power of concentration that allows a practitioner to maintain single-pointed focus during meditation. Without adequate beta capacity, meditation practice drifts into drowsiness or mind-wandering.

Gamma Training (30-42 Hz)

Goal: Increase gamma-band synchrony, typically at multiple sites simultaneously.

Mechanism: Gamma training targets the frequency band associated with the monks’ extraordinary neural integration in the Davidson-Lutz studies. High-amplitude, widespread gamma synchrony represents the brain operating as a unified, integrated whole — binding information from multiple sensory, cognitive, and emotional systems into a coherent experience.

Clinical evidence: Gamma training is the newest major neurofeedback protocol and has less clinical evidence than older protocols. Preliminary studies show improvements in cognitive function, working memory, and attention in healthy adults. Studies with elderly subjects show promise for cognitive maintenance and possible protection against cognitive decline. A small but growing body of research is exploring gamma training for peak performance, creativity, and well-being.

Consciousness application: Gamma training is the most directly aimed at the “peak” consciousness states described by contemplative traditions — the unified awareness of samadhi, the compassionate presence of bodhichitta, the non-dual awareness of rigpa. Training the brain to produce the electromagnetic pattern associated with these states is, in effect, training the neural infrastructure that supports them.

Infra-Low Frequency (ILF) Training (<0.1 Hz)

Goal: Optimize the brain’s slowest oscillations — frequencies below 0.1 Hz that regulate all faster activity.

Mechanism: Developed by Siegfried and Sue Othmer at the EEG Institute, ILF training targets frequencies that are thought to reflect the brain’s deepest regulatory rhythms. These ultra-slow oscillations modulate cortical excitability, influence blood flow dynamics, and regulate the overall state of the brain.

Clinical evidence: Clinical reports from ILF practitioners describe effects on a wide range of conditions, including anxiety, depression, PTSD, chronic pain, migraines, and autism spectrum disorders. However, controlled research is limited, and the protocol remains controversial within the neurofeedback community.

Consciousness application: ILF advocates describe the trained state as a deep, effortless stillness — a quality of awareness that is present, alert, and spacious without being focused on anything in particular. This description is consistent with what meditation traditions call “open awareness” or “choiceless awareness” — the ground state from which all specific meditation objects arise.

NeurOptimal: The Nonlinear Approach

NeurOptimal, developed by Val and Sue Brown, represents a fundamentally different approach to neurofeedback. Rather than training specific frequencies at specific sites, NeurOptimal monitors the brain’s overall activity and provides a brief interruption (a tiny skip in the music the client is listening to) whenever the brain is about to make a rapid, significant shift in state.

The theory is that these rapid shifts represent the brain falling into habitual patterns — rigid, reactive, and often maladaptive. By interrupting the shift before it completes, NeurOptimal gives the brain a chance to find a different, more flexible response. Over time, the brain becomes more fluid, less reactive, and better able to self-regulate.

NeurOptimal does not target specific symptoms or diagnose specific conditions. It is described as a “general purpose brain training” that optimizes the brain’s overall self-regulatory capacity — much as meditation is described as a general practice that benefits all aspects of mental function.

The NeurOptimal approach is philosophically aligned with nonlinear dynamics and complexity theory — the idea that the brain is a self-organizing system that, given adequate feedback about its own state, will naturally move toward optimal function. It is the neurofeedback equivalent of trusting the body’s innate healing intelligence — providing information rather than direction.

LENS: Low Energy Neurofeedback System

The Low Energy Neurofeedback System (LENS), developed by Len Ochs, takes yet another approach. Rather than training the brain through operant conditioning, LENS delivers a very low-power electromagnetic signal back to the brain that is offset by a few hertz from the brain’s dominant frequency.

The theory is that this offset signal gently disrupts the brain’s stuck patterns — rigid, repetitive oscillations that are associated with various clinical conditions (PTSD, traumatic brain injury, anxiety, depression). By disrupting these patterns, LENS allows the brain to reorganize into more flexible, adaptive patterns.

LENS sessions are remarkably brief — typically 1-5 seconds of stimulation per site, with a total session lasting 5-15 minutes. Despite (or perhaps because of) this brevity, LENS has produced striking clinical results in case series and small studies, particularly for traumatic brain injury, PTSD, and fibromyalgia.

From a consciousness perspective, LENS operates on the principle that rigid brainwave patterns are the electromagnetic expression of rigid consciousness — stuck states, fixed beliefs, repetitive thought patterns, trauma loops. Disrupting the electromagnetic pattern disrupts the consciousness pattern, freeing the system to find a new configuration.

The Evidence Base: What Does the Research Say?

The evidence base for neurofeedback varies significantly by protocol and application:

Strong Evidence

ADHD. The American Academy of Pediatrics rates neurofeedback as a Level 1 (Best Support) evidence-based intervention for ADHD, based on multiple randomized controlled trials showing improvements in attention and behavioral regulation.

Epilepsy. Sterman’s original finding has been replicated in multiple studies. SMR training reduces seizure frequency in drug-resistant epilepsy.

Anxiety. Multiple meta-analyses show moderate effect sizes for neurofeedback in reducing anxiety symptoms.

Moderate Evidence

Depression. Several RCTs show improvements in depressive symptoms, particularly with protocols targeting frontal alpha asymmetry (which is associated with approach motivation and positive affect).

Insomnia. SMR and alpha training have shown efficacy for insomnia in multiple studies.

PTSD. The alpha-theta protocol and newer protocols targeting brain connectivity have shown promise for PTSD, with several published RCTs.

Substance abuse. The Peniston-Kulkosky alpha-theta protocol has shown strong results in multiple studies, though some trials have failed to replicate the original dramatic findings.

Emerging Evidence

Peak performance. Studies of neurofeedback for cognitive enhancement, creativity, and athletic performance are growing but still limited.

Cognitive aging. Preliminary studies suggest that neurofeedback may help maintain cognitive function in aging adults.

Meditation enhancement. A small but growing number of studies are investigating whether neurofeedback accelerates meditation skill acquisition — with promising early results.

Limitations

Sham control challenges. Creating a convincing sham (placebo) condition for neurofeedback is difficult because participants can often tell whether the feedback is genuine. This complicates the interpretation of RCTs.

Protocol specificity. Different protocols produce different effects, and choosing the appropriate protocol for a given individual requires expertise. There is no one-size-fits-all approach.

Individual variability. Response to neurofeedback varies significantly between individuals. Some people respond quickly and dramatically; others show minimal changes after many sessions.

Cost and accessibility. Professional neurofeedback typically requires 20-40 sessions at $100-200 per session — a significant investment. Consumer devices (Muse, Neurosky) provide simplified neurofeedback at lower cost but with less precision.

Technology Meets Tradition: The Integration Point

The deepest significance of neurofeedback for consciousness training is not that it replaces traditional meditation — it does not. It is that it reveals the electromagnetic infrastructure of meditation.

When a Zen practitioner reports reaching a state of “no-mind” (mushin), neurofeedback shows us what happens electromagnetically: beta drops, alpha increases, the default mode network quiets. When a Tibetan practitioner generates compassion, neurofeedback shows us the gamma synchrony that accompanies it. When a shaman enters the journey state, neurofeedback shows us the theta entrainment in the temporal lobes.

This visibility has two profound implications:

Validation. Neurofeedback provides objective evidence that contemplative states are real — that they correspond to specific, measurable, reproducible brain states. This is not trivial. For centuries, the contemplative traditions have been dismissed by materialist science as subjective, unverifiable, and possibly delusional. Neurofeedback shows that the meditator’s brain is doing something measurably different from the non-meditator’s brain — and that this difference is consistent with the meditator’s subjective report.

Acceleration. Neurofeedback can accelerate the development of meditation skills by providing moment-to-moment feedback that traditional instruction cannot. A meditation teacher can tell you to “relax” or “focus” or “let go,” but cannot tell you in real time whether your brain is actually doing those things. Neurofeedback can. This moment-to-moment feedback dramatically speeds the operant conditioning process — the brain learns what the target state feels like (from the inside) and what it looks like (in the feedback display), and converges on it faster than it would through instruction alone.

The cave in the Himalaya and the clinic in Los Angeles are not opposed. They are two approaches to the same goal: training the human brain to operate in modes that support health, clarity, compassion, and integrated awareness. The monk has the depth of 50,000 hours of unmediated practice. The neurofeedback client has the precision of real-time electromagnetic feedback. The future will integrate both.

References and Further Reading

Sterman, M. B. (2000). Basic concepts and clinical findings in the treatment of seizure disorders with EEG operant conditioning. Clinical EEG, 31(1), 45-55.

Kamiya, J. (1968). Conscious control of brain waves. Psychology Today, 1(11), 56-60.

Peniston, E. G., & Kulkosky, P. J. (1989). Alpha-theta brainwave training and beta-endorphin levels in alcoholics. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 13(2), 271-279.

Arns, M., de Ridder, S., Strehl, U., Breteler, M., & Coenen, A. (2009). Efficacy of neurofeedback treatment in ADHD: The effects on inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity: A meta-analysis. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 40(3), 180-189.

Van Doren, J., Arns, M., Heinrich, H., Vollebregt, M. A., Strehl, U., & Loo, S. K. (2019). Sustained effects of neurofeedback in ADHD: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 28(3), 293-305.

Gruzelier, J. H. (2014). EEG-neurofeedback for optimising performance. I: A review of cognitive and affective outcome in healthy participants. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 44, 124-141.

Othmer, S. (2017). Protocol Guide for Neurofeedback Clinicians. EEG Info.

Hammond, D. C. (2011). What is neurofeedback: An update. Journal of Neurotherapy, 15(4), 305-336.

Lutz, A., Greischar, L. L., Rawlings, N. B., Ricard, M., & Davidson, R. J. (2004). Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony during mental practice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(46), 16369-16373.

Sitaram, R., Ros, T., Stoeckel, L., et al. (2017). Closed-loop brain training: The science of neurofeedback. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(2), 86-100.

Marzbani, H., Marateb, H. R., & Mansourian, M. (2016). Neurofeedback: A comprehensive review on system design, methodology and clinical applications. Basic and Clinical Neuroscience, 7(2), 143-158.