Key result
Instructions to increase heart rate were as effective as instructions plus true biofeedback, while decreases in heart rate were due to simple adaptation, questioning biofeedback efficacy.
Why the study?
Do instructions, biofeedback, and cognitive activities affect heart rate control?
RCT (n=180)
Do instructions, biofeedback, and cognitive activities affect heart rate control?
Biofeedback does not appear to provide additional benefit over simple instructions for increasing heart rate, and neither is more effective than sitting quietly for decreasing heart rate.
Questions biofeedback's added value over instructions for heart rate control; leaves open its clinical utility beyond adaptation.
In a factorial experiment, 90 male and 90 female subjects were given (a) either instructions to increase heart rate (HR), decrease HR, or no instructions to change their HR; (b) either true biofeedback, false biofeedback, or no biofeedback; and (c) either instructions concerning cognitions to help them change HR or no instructions concerning cognitions. The results indicated that (a) for increasing HR, instructions to increase HR were as effective as the combination of instructions and true biofeedback; (b) for decreasing HR, neither instructions nor biofeedback nor the combination of instructions and biofeedback was more effective than simply sitting quietly; (c) although subjects instructed to increase HR showed higher HRs at the end of training than subjects instructed to decrease, the increase subjects showed a decline in HR from the initial period; (d) almost all subjects reported using cognitions to influence HR, and instructions concerning the use of cognitions did not facilitate changes in HR; and (e) women showed higher HRs, which declined more slowly than those of men, but sex did not interact with any treatment variable. It was concluded that increases (or retarded decreases) in HR were due to instructions, and decreases were due to simple adaptation, thus raising serious questions concerning the effectiveness of the biofeedback component of "biofeedback training" for altering HR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
White et al. (1977) reported an RCT. Instructions, biofeedback, and cognitive activities vs. No instructions, false/no biofeedback, or no cognitive instructions was evaluated on Heart rate control. Instructions to increase heart rate were as effective as instructions plus true biofeedback, while decreases in heart rate were due to simple adaptation, questioning biofeedback efficacy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: