Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking behavior

Abstract

Aim Recent cognitive neuroscience research shows that noninvasive brain stimulation can modify a wide range of behaviors in healthy people. Such regulation effects on human behaviors provide new insights into the neurobiology of cognitive processes and establish causal brain–behavior relations. Here, we aimed to examine the effects of transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) of the prefrontal cortex on risk‐taking. Methods We performed a systematic search on the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases with appropriate keywords for original studies reporting the use of TES to modulate risk‐taking behavior in healthy individuals. Then, in the meta‐analysis phase, a random‐effects model was used to measure the pooled effect size (ES). Results Twenty articles were evaluated as eligible studies, including 16 articles on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), two on transcranial alternating current stimulation, one on transcranial pulsed current stimulation, and one on high‐definition tDCS. A meta‐analysis showed a pooled estimated standardized ES of −0.20 (95% confidence interval [CI], –0.39 to −0.01), which indicates a small ES for active tDCS over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in comparison to sham stimulation (z = 2.31, P = 0.03) in terms of less risky behaviors. Subgroup analysis showed that there is no significant ES for bilateral DLPFC stimulation (d = −0.01; 95%CI, –0.28 to 0.26), but a significant near‐medium ES for unilateral DLPFC stimulation (d = −0.41; 95%CI, –0.71 to −0.10). Conclusion Our findings support a significant impact of neuroregulation of the DLPFC on risk‐taking behavior in healthy individuals. Unilateral noninvasive electrical stimulation of the DLPFC can result in a conservative risk‐averse response style, probably through modulating plasticity of the relevant brain networks, including cortical and subcortical structures, as well as increasing subcortical dopaminergic activity.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Cognitive Training Induces Response Inhibition Facilitation Through Distinct Neural Responses According to the Stimulation Site: A Follow-up Event-Related Potentials Study

“…On the basis of the present data, such discrepancies could be of relevance to clinicians, by providing tDCS activation of the rDLPFC to patients who need to recover more inhibitory neural resources, while patients exhibiting compensatory mechanisms may need to reduce the activity allocated to the task and they should hence be offered active tDCS over the rIFG. Our results are in line with the conclusion drawn by Khaleghi et al 11 as their meta-analysis demonstrates a significant effect of unilateral tDCS over DLPFC on risk-taking behavior in healthy subjects and as authors stress the relevance of such findings for clinical disorders such as addictive behaviors. Clearly, such speculative data should be tested in further studies.…”

“…6 While CRPs may promote the development of an automatic association between a specific cue and a No-go response 7 by enhancing frontal top-down inhibitory control, 8 active tDCS over the right inferior frontal cortex (rIFC) or the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC) is thought to induce specific neural modifications including the fronto-basal-ganglia network. 9,10 In a recent meta-analysis, Khaleghi et al 11 highlight that unilateral tDCS over DLPFC leads to less risk-taking behaviors in healthy individuals through the neuromodulation of the meso-cortico-limbic dopamine system. Combining training with tDCS is nowadays thought to improve training outcomes through synergistic effects, as tDCS may enhance the training effect by facilitating learning through specific neuroplastic changes, while training could magnify the acute effect of the neuroplasticity intervention.…”

Effects of Non-invasive Neurostimulation on Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review

“…Furthermore, various studies suggest tDCS may be a useful tool to treat neuropsychiatric conditions. These studies have also shown cognitive improvement in some psychiatric conditions after tDCS interventions [27]. However, tDCS is not currently an FDA-approved treatment.…”

Computational Neuroscience Approach to Psychiatry: A Review on Theory-driven Approaches

“…It is very difficult to deal with these challenges without theoretical models, conceptual frameworks and powerful computational tools. Although experimental studies yield valuable and useful information to understand the cognitive processes and biological disturbances in mental illness [7][8][9][10][11], they are usually limited by practical, economic or ethical factors. In recent years, computational neuroscience has shown great promise in the field of psychiatry research and computational psychiatry by establishing a connection between pathophysiological and phenomenological aspects of mental illness, thereby reshaping current nosology in more biologically dimensions.…”