Transcranial direct current stimulation over right posterior parietal cortex changes prestimulus alpha oscillation in visual short-term memory task

Hsu, Tian‐Chuan; Tseng, Philip; Liang, Wei Kuang; Cheng, Shih Kuen; Juan, Chi Hung

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.04.069

Cited by 110 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results provide causal evidence to support the role of the right IFG in both proactive and reactive inhibitory control. Consistent with previous brain stimulation studies (Hsu et al, 2014;Juan & Muggleton, 2012;Jacobson et al, 2011;Chambers et al, 2006) and fMRI imaging studies (van Belle et al, 2014;White et al, 2014;Aron, 2011), we found that right IFG stimulation led to shorter SSRT in stop trials. In addition, this study provides the brain stimulation evidence for the right IFG's role in proactive inhibitory control, which is consistent with recent fMRI evidence (Thiebaut de Schotten et al, 2011;Jahfari et al, 2010; and the latest meta-analysis on a large set of fMRI studies using the SST ( van Belle et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Existing studies have suggested that the effect of tDCS is performance dependent, with a stronger effect for participants with a lower initial performance level (Hsu et al, 2014;Hughes et al, 2014;Jones & Berryhill, 2012). Our study did not provide strong support for this observation, probably because of the small sample size and narrow distribution of performance.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 91%

“…The locations of the tDCS were determined by the international 10-20 EEG electrode placement system. The right IFG was located in the middle of F4 and F8 (Votinov, Aso, Koganemaru, Fukuyama, & Mima, 2013), the right IPL in P4 (Hsu, Tseng, Liang, Cheng, & Juan, 2014), and the VC in Oz (Lu et al, 2015;Xue et al, 2012). The reference electrode was placed on the left cheek ( Figure 1B; Tseng et al, 2012;Xue et al, 2012).…”

Section: Tdcs Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Role of the Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control: A Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Study

Cai

Liu

et al. 2016

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mounting evidence suggests that response inhibition involves both proactive and reactive inhibitory control, yet its underlying neural mechanisms remain elusive. In particular, the roles of the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and inferior parietal lobe (IPL) in proactive and reactive inhibitory control are still under debate. This study aimed at examining the causal role of the right IFG and IPL in proactive and reactive inhibitory control, using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and the stop signal task. Twenty-two participants completed three sessions of the stop signal task, under anodal tDCS in the right IFG, the right IPL, or the primary visual cortex (VC; 1.5 mA for 15 min), respectively. The VC stimulation served as the active control condition. The tDCS effect for each condition was calculated as the difference between pre- and post-tDCS performance. Proactive control was indexed by the RT increase for go trials (or preparatory cost), and reactive control by the stop signal RT. Compared to the VC stimulation, anodal stimulation of the right IFG, but not that of the IPL, facilitated both proactive and reactive control. However, the facilitation of reactive control was not mediated by the facilitation of proactive control. Furthermore, tDCS did not affect the intraindividual variability in go RT. These results suggest a causal role of the right IFG, but not the right IPL, in both reactive and proactive inhibitory control.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 91%

Section: Tdcs Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of the Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control: A Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Study

Cai

Liu

et al. 2016

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a visual short-term memory (VSTM) task, only low performers benefited from atDCS on rPPC, whereas high performers did not (Hsu et al, 2014;Tseng et al, 2012). Concurrent EEG recording revealed that high performers showed equally large waveforms (Tseng et al, 2012) or alpha power (Hsu et al, 2014) in the respective neuronal EEG correlates before and after stimulation, suggesting that tDCS probably did not provide any further enhancement beyond an optimum of network efficiency in cognitive processing, which high performers recruited 'naturally' (Hoy et al, 2013).…”

Section: Tdcs Stimulation-effects Of Inter-individual Differencesmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Finally, with respect to behavioural parameters and cognitive functions, tDCS effects not only depend on activation state of the network at stimulation and learning phase, but also on the individual baseline performance and the people's natural receptivity to tDCS, factors that contribute to considerable interindividual differences Dockery et al, 2009;Hsu et al, 2014;Tseng et al, 2012). In a visual short-term memory (VSTM) task, only low performers benefited from atDCS on rPPC, whereas high performers did not (Hsu et al, 2014;Tseng et al, 2012).…”

Section: Tdcs Stimulation-effects Of Inter-individual Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulation of attention functions by anodal tDCS on right PPC

Roy

Sparing²,

Fink

et al. 2015

Neuropsychologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional brain changes associated with cognitive trajectories determine specific tDCS‐induced effects among older adults

Vaqué‐Alcázar

Abellaneda‐Pérez

Solé‐Padullés

et al. 2021

J of Neuroscience Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The combination of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can provide original data to investigate age‐related brain changes. We examined neural activity modulations induced by two multifocal tDCS procedures based on two distinct montages fitting two N‐back task‐based fMRI patterns (“compensatory” and “maintenance”) related to high working memory (WM) in a previous publication (Fernández‐Cabello et al. Neurobiol Aging (2016);48:23–33). We included 24 participants classified as stable or decliners according to their 4‐year WM trajectories following a retrospective longitudinal approach. Then, we studied longitudinal fMRI differences between groups (stable and decliners) and across multifocal tDCS montages (“compensatory” and “maintenance”) applied using a single‐blind sham‐controlled cross‐over design. Decliners evidenced over‐activation of non‐related WM areas after 4 years of follow‐up. Focusing on tDCS effects, among the decliner group, the “compensatory”‐tDCS montage reduced the activity over the posterior regions where these subjects showed longitudinal hyperactivation. These results reinforce the notion that tDCS effects are characterized by an activity reduction and might be more noticeable in compromised systems. Importantly, the data provide novel evidence that cognitive trajectories predict tDCS effects in older adults.

show abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation over right posterior parietal cortex changes prestimulus alpha oscillation in visual short-term memory task

Cited by 110 publications

References 78 publications

The Role of the Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control: A Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Study

The Role of the Frontal and Parietal Cortex in Proactive and Reactive Inhibitory Control: A Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Study

Modulation of attention functions by anodal tDCS on right PPC

Functional brain changes associated with cognitive trajectories determine specific tDCS‐induced effects among older adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About