@article{EhlersGrimmerStracketal.,
  author    = {Ehlers, Jan and Grimmer, Janine and Strack, Veronika and Huckauf, Anke},
  title     = {The influence of sham feedback on physiological processing during fear-driven stimulation},
  series = {PLOS ONE},
  journal   = {PLOS ONE},
  number    = {Volume 16, issue 5, article e0251211},
  publisher = {PLOS},
  address   = {San Francisco, Calif.},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0251211},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:gbv:wim2-20210510-44249},
  pages     = {1 -- 17},
  abstract  = {Biofeedback constitutes a well-established, non-invasive method to voluntary interfere in emotional processing by means of cognitive strategies. However, treatment durations exhibit strong inter-individual variations and first successes can often be achieved only after a large number of sessions. Sham feedback constitutes a rather untapped approach by providing feedback that does not correspond to the participant's actual state. The current study aims to gain insights into mechanisms of sham feedback processing in order to support new techniques in biofeedback therapy. We carried out two experiments and applied different types of sham feedback on skin conductance responses and pupil size changes during affective processing. Results indicate that standardized but context-sensitive sham signals based on skin conductance responses exert a stronger influence on emotional regulation compared to individual sham feedback from ongoing pupil dynamics. Also, sham feedback should forego unnatural signal behavior to avoid irritation and skepticism among participants. Altogether, a reasonable combination of stimulus features and sham feedback characteristics enables to considerably reduce the actual bodily responsiveness already within a single session.},
  subject      = {Biofeedback},
  language  = {en}
}