Budzynski and Stoyva (supporting study) - biofeedback as a treatment for stress

aim

To describe a biofeedback instrument incorporating the operant conditioning principles of immediate knowledge of results and systematic shaping of responses.

sample

15 participants.

Paid $1.50 each session and told a bonus would be given according to their rank in the group, with the lower the muscle activity, the larger the bonus.

controls

Random allocation to one of three groups.

The level of independent variable (group) the participants participated in:

1) The experimental group - correct feedback: Participants were told that the pitch of the tone of the instrument would vary with the level of muscle tension in their forehead. They were told to relax as much as possible and to try and keep the tone low in pitch.

2) The first control group - no feedback (silence): Participants were asked to relax as much as possible, especially the forehead muscle.

3) The second control group - irrelevant feedback: Participants were told to relax deeply, especially the muscle in the forehead and were also told that the low monotonous tone would help them relax.

Results compared against baseline measures which were gathered without any feedback.

Two measures were taken, and the second used so that participants were more used to the surroundings.

Time of day for the recordings remained the same for every participant measurement.

DV = the reduction in action potential in the muscles, measured by electrodes placed on the forehead muscles in microvolts.

apparatus

EMG (machine with electrodes that measure muscle tension).

method

Electrodes placed one inch above each eyebrow and spaced four inches apart on the participant's forehead.

Each participant was then told to lie quietly with their eyes closed and to concentrate on relaxing the frontalis (forehead) muscle (chosen because this muscle is difficult to relax).

If the participant could control this muscle, then the procedure would be applicable to less-difficult muscles.

All participants initially tested and results recorded without any feedback (noise) on two occasions.

The remaining recordings were taken at around the same time of day (late afternoon, early evening).

After the initial sessions, the remaining sessions took place in the form of 20x 1 min trials, separated by at least a day but by no more than 3 days.

results

There were clear differences among the groups in relation to mean levels of muscle action potential, even from session 2 when the tone was first introduced.

Baseline levels (session 1) were compared with post-training levels (session 5) and found:

-- A 50% mean decrease in action potential in the experimental group (correct feedback).

-- A 20% mean decrease in action potential in the second control group (silence).

-- A 28% mean increase in action potential in the first control group (irrelevant feedback).

The effectiveness for the instrument was supported further by one participant who was originally in the irrelevant feedback group. The participant had shown consistently high levels of muscle action potential during the sessions.

This participant was then given correct feedback training for four additional sessions and their muscle action potential decreased significantly following the first extra feedback session and by the third extra session it had dropped by 50% from session 5.

concluson

The findings suggest biofeedback in the form of immediate accurate information about bodily stress (for example, muscle tension) may be a useful tool in behavioural therapy and for use with people with certain psychosomatic disorders.

*Psychosomatic = health issues caused or worsened by mental factors.

strength - no side effects

A strength is that unlike drug therapies, biofeedback does not cause physical side effects like sickness. This makes it a more ethical option, and patients are less likely to drop out of treatment.

weakness - only treats physical symptoms

A weakness is that the therapy only treats physical symptoms (like heart rate) rather than the underlying cause of the stress. If the stressor remains, the treatment may not be a permanent solution. For some, trying to control the biofeedback machine (especially when tied to rewards or bonuses) can actually increase stress levels rather than reduce them.

strength - application to everyday life

A primary strength of biofeedback is that it provides individuals with relaxation techniques that can be applied to various stressful situations in their daily lives. This suggests it offers a more durable solution than treatments that do not teach self-management skills.

weakness - application to everyday life

A significant limitation is that biofeedback only targets the physical symptoms of stress, such as muscle tension and elevated heart rate. Because the therapy focuses on reducing the body's response rather than addressing the external stressor itself, the original cause of stress may remain. Consequently, the treatment may not be an effective permanent solution if the environmental or situational triggers are not resolved.