# A Wireless EEG System for Neurofeedback Training
## 5 Discussion
The high \(\theta\) oscillations in the frontal cortex of the pre-training group related to the low-contrast condition could be associated with the requirements for more cognitive resources for the task's performance. Additionally, the left MTG and left MOG of the preD group showed low \(\alpha/\theta\) scores (high \(\theta\) power). The language processing was subserved in both hemispheres by the MST and its right side for visuospatial information storage [39]. Hence, the lower \(\alpha/\theta\) lateralization of MST may imply a compensatory mechanism in the post-training DD children [39]. During the stimulus, right-hemispheric high \(\alpha/\theta\) score (high \(\alpha\)-band power) was observed in the preD group, while in the postD group, widespread \(\alpha/\theta\) growth was found in both hemispheres. In general, attention-relevant \(\alpha\) activity was not restricted to visual stimulus processing [40; 41], whereas pre-stimulus \(\alpha\) power was modulated by accuracy and attention to stimulus processing. The low \(\alpha/\theta\) scores (increased \(\theta\)-band activity) bilateral at the frontal, temporal, and parietal areas in the pre-training dyslexics could be related to mental fatigue, worse performance [42], and also aberrations in global brain organization of verbal and spatial cognitive skills [43]. The left-lateralized \(\alpha/\theta\) scores of the post-training dyslexics (\(\alpha\)-band power [44]) correlated with focusing on processing local LSF elements [45], while the right-side high \(\alpha/\theta\) scores (high \(\alpha\) activity) in the pre-training group correlated with the worse global attention bias. The selection of attention at the local or global level of information is governed by a cortical attentional mechanism established in the temporoparietal junction and depending on the visual task-related conditions [46]. Global form identification was associated with higher activation of the lingual gyrus in the right hemisphere and the local element identification with that of the inferior occipital gyrus in the left hemisphere [47; 48]. The occipital cortex rapidly relays the coarse information about the LSF illusion through the parietal and frontal cortices (dorsal route) before spreading to the inferotemporal cortex, mediating LSF recognition (ventral route [49]). Better \(\alpha\) and \(\theta\) activity of the postD group in the frontal, temporoparietal, and middle occipital regions was associated with detection from the visual areas of the LSF identification Gabor gratings during the neurofeedback. They recognize coarse LSF information more quickly through projections to the orbitofrontal cortex, which is strongly and reciprocally connected to the temporal cortex [50]. In the right hemisphere, the recognition of the fine LSF illusion elements preferentially occurred from the occipital cortex to the ITG [48], whereas the temporal and orbitofrontal cortices were involved during its coarse recognition, suggesting strong intra-hemispheric functional interactions. Through the top-down connections of the frontal, temporal, and parietal cortices to the visual cortex [47; 51], the fine stimulus features were analyzed and selected, whereas the cerebral hemispheres were complementary in the postD group's stimulus processing. The better left-hemispheric \(\alpha/\theta\) scores of the postD group in the temporoparietal and middle occipital regions can be associated with an improvement in spatial frequency processing [52], while the better scores in the precentral and parietal cortices can be associated with an advancement of the temporal processing efficiency of the illusion through the magnocellular pathway in both contrast conditions [53].