Biofeedback vs. Neurofeedback: What’s the Difference?
On this page
As people explore biofeedback, they often encounter a related term, neurofeedback, and wonder how the two differ. Are they the same thing? Is one better? The relationship is actually straightforward once explained: neurofeedback is a specific type of biofeedback, focused on the brain. Understanding what distinguishes them, and how they relate, clarifies a commonly confused pair. Here is a clear explanation of biofeedback versus neurofeedback.
The simple relationship
Let us start with the key relationship, since it resolves most of the confusion. Neurofeedback is a type of biofeedback, specifically the kind that focuses on brain activity. Biofeedback is the broad category, using sensors to measure various bodily functions and feed them back so you can learn to regulate them, while neurofeedback is the branch of biofeedback that measures and trains brain activity in particular.
So the two are not opposed or entirely separate; rather, neurofeedback sits within biofeedback as a specialized form. When people say biofeedback in the general sense, they often mean training of bodily functions like heart rate or muscle tension, and when they say neurofeedback, they mean the specific training of brainwaves. Understanding this nested relationship, neurofeedback as a specific kind of biofeedback focused on the brain, is the foundation for understanding the difference, which comes down mainly to what is being measured and trained, as the following sections explain.
What biofeedback measures
To see the distinction clearly, it helps to recall what general biofeedback measures, since this defines the broad category. Biofeedback, in the general sense, measures bodily functions of the body outside the brain, the peripheral physiology, such as heart rate and heart rate variability, muscle tension, skin temperature, sweat-gland activity, and breathing.
Using sensors on the skin or fingers, biofeedback feeds back these signals so a person can learn to influence them, for example relaxing muscles, calming heart rate, or warming the hands, through relaxation and other strategies. This general biofeedback is used for conditions like headaches, incontinence, stress, and high blood pressure, training the regulation of these bodily functions. It works with the body’s measurable peripheral signals, the readouts of the heart, muscles, skin, and breath. Understanding that general biofeedback measures and trains these bodily, non-brain functions establishes one side of the comparison, against which neurofeedback’s specific focus on the brain stands out, clarifying exactly what differentiates the two.
What neurofeedback measures
Now to neurofeedback specifically, which focuses on the brain. Neurofeedback measures brain activity, typically electrical activity in the form of brainwaves recorded from the scalp, and feeds that information back so a person can learn to influence their own brain activity patterns.
In a neurofeedback session, sensors placed on the scalp pick up brainwave activity, which is displayed back to the person, often through a screen or game-like interface, allowing them to learn, through feedback, to shift their brainwave patterns in desired directions. The aim is to train the brain toward patterns associated with desired states, such as focus or calm. Neurofeedback is explored for conditions and goals related to brain function and mental states, such as attention, anxiety, and certain neurological conditions. So neurofeedback differs from general biofeedback in measuring and training brain activity specifically, rather than peripheral bodily functions. Understanding that neurofeedback focuses on brainwaves completes the core distinction, with biofeedback training the body’s peripheral signals and neurofeedback training the brain’s activity.
The key difference, summarized
Pulling it together gives a clear summary of the difference, which is essentially about focus. The core distinction is what is measured and trained: general biofeedback trains peripheral bodily functions, like heart rate, muscle tension, and skin temperature, while neurofeedback trains brain activity, the brainwaves. Both work on the same principle of using real-time feedback to learn self-regulation, but they target different systems.
In other respects they are similar: both use sensors and feedback, both aim to teach self-regulation through practice, and both are forms of biofeedback in the broad sense. The difference is the target, body versus brain. This is why neurofeedback is often named separately despite being a type of biofeedback: its focus on the brain, with scalp sensors and brainwave training, is distinctive enough to warrant its own term. Understanding that the key difference is simply the focus, peripheral body functions for general biofeedback, brain activity for neurofeedback, captures the essential distinction clearly and simply, within their shared nature as feedback-based self-regulation methods.
A note on evidence
Honesty about the evidence for each is worthwhile, since it differs somewhat. General biofeedback has strong evidence for certain uses, being well-established for migraine and tension-type headaches and effective for urinary incontinence, among others. Neurofeedback’s evidence base is generally more mixed and still developing, with some support for certain uses but more variability and ongoing research about its effectiveness for various conditions.
So while both are legitimate biofeedback approaches grounded in real physiology and learning, the strength of evidence varies, with some general biofeedback applications particularly well-supported and neurofeedback’s evidence more mixed and emerging for many of its proposed uses. This is not to dismiss neurofeedback, which is a genuine approach under active study, but to note honestly that evidence differs by application for both. As with any such method, it is wise to have realistic expectations and to consider the evidence for the specific use in question. Understanding that evidence varies, and tends to be stronger for some established biofeedback uses than for many neurofeedback applications, adds an honest, evidence-aware dimension to the comparison.
Keeping it in perspective
A closing perspective ties it together. Biofeedback and neurofeedback are closely related: neurofeedback is a specific type of biofeedback focused on the brain. The core difference is what is measured and trained, general biofeedback works with peripheral bodily functions like heart rate, muscle tension, and skin temperature, while neurofeedback trains brain activity in the form of brainwaves, both using real-time feedback to teach self-regulation.
Both are legitimate, instrument-based approaches grounded in real physiology, though evidence varies by application, being particularly strong for some general biofeedback uses like headaches and incontinence, and more mixed and emerging for many neurofeedback uses. As with any such method, realistic expectations, attention to the evidence for the specific use, and use with a qualified practitioner and as part of proper care are sensible. Kept in this perspective, the difference between biofeedback and neurofeedback can be understood clearly, body versus brain, within their shared nature as genuine, feedback-based methods of learning self-regulation.
Common questions
Is neurofeedback the same as biofeedback? Neurofeedback is a specific type of biofeedback, the kind focused on the brain. Biofeedback is the broad category training various bodily functions, while neurofeedback specifically measures and trains brain activity, or brainwaves. So they are related, with neurofeedback nested within biofeedback, differing mainly in what they target.
What is the main difference between them? The key difference is what is measured and trained: general biofeedback trains peripheral bodily functions like heart rate, muscle tension, and skin temperature, while neurofeedback trains brain activity, the brainwaves, using scalp sensors. Both use real-time feedback to teach self-regulation; they simply target the body versus the brain.
Is one more proven than the other? Evidence varies by application. General biofeedback has strong evidence for some uses, like migraine and tension-type headaches and urinary incontinence, while neurofeedback’s evidence is generally more mixed and still developing for many of its proposed uses. Both are legitimate approaches, but it is wise to consider the evidence for the specific use.
The bottom line
Biofeedback and neurofeedback are closely related, with neurofeedback being a specific type of biofeedback focused on the brain. The core difference is what is measured and trained: general biofeedback works with peripheral bodily functions like heart rate, muscle tension, and skin temperature, while neurofeedback trains brain activity in the form of brainwaves using scalp sensors, both relying on real-time feedback to teach self-regulation. Both are legitimate, instrument-based approaches grounded in real physiology, though evidence varies, being particularly strong for some general biofeedback uses and more mixed and emerging for many neurofeedback applications. Understood simply as body versus brain within a shared method, the distinction is clear, and both are best used with realistic expectations and as part of proper care.
Sources
- About Biofeedback – Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback (AAPB)
- Efficacy of Biofeedback for Medical Conditions: an Evidence Map (NIH/PMC)
This article is for general information only and is not medical advice. Biofeedback and neurofeedback are best used with a qualified practitioner and as part of proper care for medical conditions. Consider the evidence for your specific use and consult a healthcare professional.