Speakers: Harold Russell, Ph.D. and Thomas Collura, Ph.D.
The Possible Use of Inexpensive Sensory Stimulation Technologies to Improve IQ Test Scores and Behavior
The brain has the ability throughout life to continuously change its structure and functioning in response to the nature of the stimulation it receives from its ongoing experience. The brain's ability to modify itself is called neuroplasticity or brain plasticity. Current research indicates that major neuroplastic changes such as synaptogenesis, development of new neural pathways and brain reorganization have been reported to be induced by repetitive sensory (audiovisual) stimulation.
Technology has been developed and field tested that uses the ongoing EEG activity of the brain to control the nature of the sensory stimulation it receives. A series of controlled studies that utilized this technology were conducted over a three year time span with LD/ADD/ADHD children. The findings indicated the children made significant and lasting cognitive and behavioral gains that were maintained on 16 months follow up.
The ultimate form of this technology will be specifically designed to be inexpensive and simple enough to use to be practical for group use in schools or other settings where costs (both for acquisition and the personnel required) must be at an absolute minimum for large scale adoption and use. An interim version is available now for the collection of the research data necessary for a thorough evaluation of the effectiveness of the procedures for increasing children's IQ test performance and improving their behavior. An investigation to be conducted at Stanford has been proposed to explore the effectiveness of rhythmic sensory stimulation in increasing children's performance on IQ tests and improving their behavior while systematically collecting brain imaging data on any associated changes in their brain structure and brain functioning. Ideas or modifications that might add to the optimization and scientific acceptability of the findings of the investigation will be particularly welcomed and considered. Some investigators whose interests and expertise are in areas closely related to this topic might be interested in discussing some form of collaboration with Stanford.
Beyond the current proposal with Stanford there is strong evidence in the scientific literature that suggests that this sensory stimulation technology may have an influence on other neurological disorders that are characterized by reduced levels of electrical or circulatory activity or abnormal neurotransmitter levels. Examples could be stroke, mild traumatic brain injury, anxiety and depression and possibly even Parkinson's. Evidence of structural and functioning changes in the brains of children subsequent to repetitive rhythmic sensory stimulation in the Stanford studies could offer reasonable support for the possibility of similar findings in adults. The potential for follow up studies is of interest to the author and possibly to Stanford.
If the proposed research offers convincing evidence that it is possible to safely, inexpensively and effectively enable large numbers of children to function at higher levels on measures of cognitive performance and to be less impulsive in their behavior, then the data from a large relational database available at Ohio State University (The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) ) suggests strongly that such an outcome would have major and positive socioeconomic consequences.
The concept of stimulating the brain to change it's functioning is not new (LS Illis,1983). My distinct impression after several thousand hours of study of several thousand references is that the amount and location of repetitive neuronal activation generated by stimuli is far more important than the form of the stimulation evoking the activation whether audiovisual, electrical, electromagnetic, musical or intellectual challenge.