Skip to main content
Log in

EMG biofeedback and discriminative muscle control

  • Research Recognition Award Paper
  • Published:
Biofeedback and Self-regulation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The awareness model of biofeedback suggests that training teaches new skills or enhances performance at old skills, while the cognitive or feed-forward models suggest that biofeedback brings attention to the response of interest but does not actually increase task skill. In a test of the predictions made by these models, subjects were tested on one or more cross-modal matching tasks, provided brief training, and retested on the task(s). Thirty subjects participated in integer-matching tasks in which they were instructed to produce various levels of frontalis activity corresponding to the levels of a ratio scale. Forty-five subjects participated in a tone-matching task in which they tried to match their frontalis tension to the pitch of a tone. The results indicated that the groups receiving biofeedback training improved at the more difficult integer task and at the tone task. Subjects performed better on the integer tasks than at the tone task. Our findings suggest that an awareness model accounts for changes occurring during biofeedback training. However, an awareness model may be applicable only for tasks of moderate difficulty; for relatively easy tasks, a feed-forward model may be more appropriate. The clinical utility of cross-modal matching tasks is also described.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Appelbaum, K. A., Blanchard, E. B., & Andrasik, F. (1984). Muscle discrimination ability at three muscle sites in three headache groups.Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 9 421–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basmajian, J. V. (Ed.). (1979).Biofeedback: Principles and practice for clinicians. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilodeau, I. M. (1969). Information feedback. In E. A. Bilodeau & I. M. Bilodeau (Eds.),Principles of skill acquisition (pp. 255–285). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, E. B., Jurish, S. E., Andrasik, F., & Epstein, L. H. (1981). The relationship between muscle discrimination ability and response to relaxation training in three kinds of headaches.Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 6 537–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brener, J. (1977). Sensory and perceptual determinants of voluntary visceral control. In G. E. Schwartz & J. Beatty (Eds.),Biofeedback: Theory and research (pp. 29–66). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, T. G., Gillig, S. E., Ponsor, S. E., Weil, N., & Utz, S. W. (1986). The learning process in biofeedback: Is it feed-forward or feedback?Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 11 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durlach, N. I., & Braida, L. D. (1969). Intensity perception. I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46 372–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijzen, T. H., Slangen, J. L., & Van Houweligen, H. C. (1986). Subjective, clinical and EMG effects of biofeedback and splint treatment.Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 13 529–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippold, O. (1967). Electromyography. In P. Venables & I. Martin (Eds.),Manual of psychophysiological methods. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, R. Q., Jr., & Katkin, E. S. (1984). Placebo effects in biofeedback and self-perception of muscle tension.Psychophysiology, 21 47–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppen, R., Hanson, H. B., & Ip, S-M. V. (1988). Generalization of EMG biofeedback training.Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 13 235–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, S. S. (1958). Problems and methods of psychophysics.Psychological Bulletin, 55 177–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stilson, D. W., Matus, I., & Ball, G. (1980). Relaxation and subjective estimates of muscle tension: Implications for a central efferent theory of muscle control.Biofeedback and Self-Regulation, 5 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surwit, R. S., Williams, R. B., & Shapiro, D. (1982).Behavioral approaches to cardiovascular disease. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L. M., & Lockhead, G. R. (1970). Sequential effects and memory in category judgments.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 84 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This paper is based on a thesis conducted by the second author under the direction of the first author. Portions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, March 1989, San Diego.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Glaros, A.G., Hanson, K. EMG biofeedback and discriminative muscle control. Biofeedback and Self-Regulation 15, 135–143 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999144

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999144

Descriptor Key Words

Navigation