The Impact of Coherence Neurofeedback on Reading Delays in Learning Disabled Children: A Randomized Controlled Study

Robert Coben, Emma Kate Wright, Scott L Decker, Tina Morgan


Introduction: Learning disabilities are a complex problem facing our society and educational system. Dyslexia, or reading disability, is one of the most common learning disabilities, impacting children and adults adversely in a myriad of ways. Traditional programs designed to teach reading enhancement are largely ineffective or require intensive therapy over long periods of time. Method: Forty-two school-aged participants were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The experimental group received qEEG-guided, individuallytailored, two-channel coherence neurofeedback over the left hemisphere. This included two sessions per week for a total of 20 sessions. The control group received typical resource room instruction. All participants received pre- and post-educational measures focused on reading abilities. Results: Following the intervention period, the experimental group enhanced their reading scores, while the control group did not. Coherence neurofeedback led to an average enhancement of 1.2 grade levels in reading scores, but resource room instruction led to no such improvement at all. Conclusion: Coherence-based neurofeedback would appear to show promise and led to significant gains in reading that outpace those of traditional reading programs and most types of neurofeedback studied in the past. Future clinical and research work in this understudied area is recommended.


Neurofeedback, Coherence, Reading, Dyslexia, Learning Disability

Full Text:



Bentum, K. W., & Aaron, P. G. (2003). Does reading instruction in learning disability resource rooms real work?: A longitudinal study.Reading Psychology, 24, 361–382.

Breteler, M. H. M., Arns, M., Peters, S., Giepmans, I., & Verhoeven, L. (2010). Improvements in spelling after QEEG-based neurofeedback in Dyslexia: A randomized controlled treatment study. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 35(1), 5–11.

Cannon, R., Congedo, M., Lubar, J., & Hutchens, T. (2009). Differentiating a network of executive attention: LoretaNeurofeedback in anterior cingulate and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices. International Journal of Neuroscience, 119(3),404–441.

Coben, R. (2014, October). Four Channel Multivariate Coherence Training: Rationale and Findings. [Plenary session]. Presented at the ISNR 22nd Annual Conference, San Diego, CA.

Coben, R., Mohammed-Rezazadeh, I., & Cannon, R. L. (2014).Using quantitative and analytic EEG methods in the understanding of connectivity in autism spectrum disorders: A theory of mixed over- and under-connectivity. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 45.

Coben, R., & Myers, T. E. (2010). The relative efficacy of connectivity guided and symptom based EEG biofeedback for autistic disorders. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 35(1), 13–23.

Coben, R., & Padolsky, I. (2007). Assessment-Guided Neurofeedback for Autistic Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Neurotherapy, 11(1),5–23.

Cortiella, C., & Horowitz, S. H. (2014). The State of Learning Disabilities: Facts, Trends, and Emerging Issues (3rd ed.). New York: National Center for Learning Disabilities.

Deymed Diagnostic (2004). TruScan EEG Specifications. Retrieved from

Eden, G. F., & Zeffiro, T. A. (1998). Neural systems affected in developmental dyslexia revealed by functional neuroimaging. Neuron, 21(2), 279–282.

Fernández, T., Herrera, W., Harmony, T., Díaz-Comas, L., Santiago, E., Sánchez, L., ... Valdés, R. (2003). EEG and behavioral changes following neurofeedback treatment in learning disabled children. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 34(3), 145¬–152.

Grass SafeLead (2006). Genuine Grass precious metal recording electrodes: SafeLead. Retrieved from

Hudspeth, W. J. (1999). NeuroRep QEEG analysis and report system. Los Osos, CA: Neuropsychometrix.

John, E. R., Prichep, L. S., Fridman, J., & Easton, P. (1988). Neurometrics: Computer-assisted differential diagnosis of brain dysfunctions. Science, 239, 162–169.

Lindamood-Bell Learning Processes. (2005). Lindamood-Bell Learning Processes 2005 clinical statistics. Retrieved from

Lubar, J. F., Bianchini, K. J., Calhoun, W. H., Lambert, E. W., Brody, Z. H., & Shabsin, H. S. (1985). Spectral analysis of EEG differences between children with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18(7), 403–408.

McCandliss, B. D., & Noble, K. G. (2003). The development of reading impairment: a cognitive neuroscience model. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 9(3), 196–205.

Michel, C. M., & Murray, M. M. (2012). Towards the utilization of EEG as a brain imaging tool. NeuroImage, 61(2), 371–385.

National Reading Panel,National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Retrieved from

Nazari, M. A., Masonezhad, E., Hashemi, T., & Jahan, A. (2012).The effectiveness of neurofeedback training on EEG coherence and neuropsychological functions in children with reading disability. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience, 43(4), 315–322.

NeuroCybernetics Inc. (2006). Specific EEGer technical parameters. Canoga Park, CA: NeuroCybernetics Inc.

NxLink (2001).Neurometric analysis system. Richland, WA: NxLink Ltd.

Orlando, P. C., & Rivera, R. O. (2004). Neurofeedback for elementary students with identified learning problems. Journal of Neurotherapy, 8(2), 5–19.

Ramus, F. (2004). Neurobiology of dyslexia: A reinterpretation of the data. Trends in Neurosciences, 27(12), 720–726.

Ritchey, K. D., &Goeke, J. L. (2006). Orton-Gillingham and Orton-Gilliangham-based reading instruction: A review of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 171–183.

Shaywitz, S. E. (1998). Dyslexia. The New England Journal of Medicine, 338(5), 307–312.

Shaywitz, S. E., Fletcher, J. M., & Shaywitz, B. A. (1994). Issues in the definition and classification of attention deficit disorder. Topics in Language Disorders, 14(4), 1–25.

Shaywitz, S. E., Gruen, J. R., &Shaywitz, B. A. (2007). Management of dyslexia, its rationale, and underlying neurobiology. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 54(3), 609–623.

Shaywitz, S. E., & Shaywitz, B. A. (2004). Reading disability and the brain. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 6–11.

Sheffield, B. B. (1991). The structured flexibility of Orton-Gillingham.Annals of Dyslexia, 41(1),41–54.

Strong, G. K., Torgerson, C. J., Torgerson, D., & Hulme, C. (2011). A systematic meta-analytic review of evidence for the effectiveness of the ‘Fast ForWord’ language intervention program. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(3),224–235.

Temple, E., Deutsch, G. K., Poldrack, R. A., Miller, S. L., Tallal, P., Merzenich, M. M., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2003).Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioral remediation: Evidence from functional MRI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100(5),2860–2865.

Thatcher, R. W. (2010). Validity and Reliability of Quantitative Electroencephalography. Journal of Neurotherapy, 14(2), 122–152.

Thatcher, R. W., Walker, R. A., Biver, C. J., North, D. N., & Curtin, R. (2003). Quantitative EEG Normative Databases: Validation and Clinical Correlation. Journal of Neurotherapy, 7(3–4), 87–121.

Thornton, K. (2006). Subtype analysis of learning disability by quantitative electroencephalography patterns. Biofeedback, 34(3), 106–113.

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES). (2008). Lindamood Phonemic Sequencing (LiPS). Retrieved from

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES). (2010a). Orton-Gillingham-Based Strategies (Unbranded). Retrieved from

U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES). (2010b). Wilson Reading System. Retrieved from

Vaughn, S., & Wanzek, J. (2014). Intensive interventions in reading for students with reading disabilities: Meaningful impacts. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 29(2), 46–53.

Wiederholt, J. L., & Bryant, B. R. (2001). GORT 4 Gray Oral Reading Tests Examiner’s Manual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Wilson, B. A. (1998). Matching student needs to instruction: Teaching reading and spelling using the Wilson Reading System. In S.A.Vogel & S.M. Reder (Eds.),Learning disabilities, literacy, and adult education (pp. 213–235). Baltimore, MD: P. H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Wilson, B. A., & O’Connor, J. R. (1995). Effectiveness of the Wilson Reading System used in public school training. In C.McIntyreand J.Pickering (Eds.),Clinical Studies of Multisensory Structured Language Education (pp. 247–254). Salem, OR: International Multisensory Structured Language Education Council.

Wood, F. (2002). Wilson literacy solutions: Evidence of effectiveness. (Unpublished data compilation report). Oxford, MA: Wilson Language Training Corp.

Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2007). Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2015 Robert Coben, Emma Kate Wright, Scott L Decker, Tina Morgan

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.



             ISSN: 2373-0587