Cargando…

Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage

INTRODUCTION: Attempts to improve cognitive abilities via transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have led to ambiguous results, likely due to the method’s susceptibility to methodological and inter-individual factors. Conventional tDCS, i.e., using an active electrode over brain areas associ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Menze, Inga, Mueller, Notger G., Zaehle, Tino, Schmicker, Marlen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10034341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36968784
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1134632
_version_ 1784911196171796480
author Menze, Inga
Mueller, Notger G.
Zaehle, Tino
Schmicker, Marlen
author_facet Menze, Inga
Mueller, Notger G.
Zaehle, Tino
Schmicker, Marlen
author_sort Menze, Inga
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Attempts to improve cognitive abilities via transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have led to ambiguous results, likely due to the method’s susceptibility to methodological and inter-individual factors. Conventional tDCS, i.e., using an active electrode over brain areas associated with the targeted cognitive function and a supposedly passive reference, neglects stimulation effects on entire neural networks. METHODS: We investigated the advantage of frontoparietal network stimulation (right prefrontal anode, left posterior parietal cathode) against conventional and sham tDCS in modulating working memory (WM) capacity dependent transfer effects of a single-session distractor inhibition (DIIN) training. Since previous results did not clarify whether electrode montage drives this individual transfer, we here compared conventional to frontoparietal and sham tDCS and reanalyzed data of 124 young, healthy participants in a more robust way using linear mixed effect modeling. RESULTS: The interaction of electrode montage and WM capacity resulted in systematic differences in transfer effects. While higher performance gains were observed with increasing WM capacity in the frontoparietal stimulation group, low WM capacity individuals benefited more in the sham condition. The conventional stimulation group showed subtle performance gains independent of WM capacity. DISCUSSION: Our results confirm our previous findings of WM capacity dependent transfer effects on WM by a single-session DIIN training combined with tDCS and additionally highlight the pivotal role of the specific electrode montage. WM capacity dependent differences in frontoparietal network recruitment, especially regarding the parietal involvement, are assumed to underlie this observation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10034341
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100343412023-03-24 Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage Menze, Inga Mueller, Notger G. Zaehle, Tino Schmicker, Marlen Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience INTRODUCTION: Attempts to improve cognitive abilities via transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have led to ambiguous results, likely due to the method’s susceptibility to methodological and inter-individual factors. Conventional tDCS, i.e., using an active electrode over brain areas associated with the targeted cognitive function and a supposedly passive reference, neglects stimulation effects on entire neural networks. METHODS: We investigated the advantage of frontoparietal network stimulation (right prefrontal anode, left posterior parietal cathode) against conventional and sham tDCS in modulating working memory (WM) capacity dependent transfer effects of a single-session distractor inhibition (DIIN) training. Since previous results did not clarify whether electrode montage drives this individual transfer, we here compared conventional to frontoparietal and sham tDCS and reanalyzed data of 124 young, healthy participants in a more robust way using linear mixed effect modeling. RESULTS: The interaction of electrode montage and WM capacity resulted in systematic differences in transfer effects. While higher performance gains were observed with increasing WM capacity in the frontoparietal stimulation group, low WM capacity individuals benefited more in the sham condition. The conventional stimulation group showed subtle performance gains independent of WM capacity. DISCUSSION: Our results confirm our previous findings of WM capacity dependent transfer effects on WM by a single-session DIIN training combined with tDCS and additionally highlight the pivotal role of the specific electrode montage. WM capacity dependent differences in frontoparietal network recruitment, especially regarding the parietal involvement, are assumed to underlie this observation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10034341/ /pubmed/36968784 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1134632 Text en Copyright © 2023 Menze, Mueller, Zaehle and Schmicker. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Menze, Inga
Mueller, Notger G.
Zaehle, Tino
Schmicker, Marlen
Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
title Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
title_full Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
title_fullStr Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
title_full_unstemmed Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
title_short Individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
title_sort individual response to transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of working memory capacity and electrode montage
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10034341/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36968784
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1134632
work_keys_str_mv AT menzeinga individualresponsetotranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationasafunctionofworkingmemorycapacityandelectrodemontage
AT muellernotgerg individualresponsetotranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationasafunctionofworkingmemorycapacityandelectrodemontage
AT zaehletino individualresponsetotranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationasafunctionofworkingmemorycapacityandelectrodemontage
AT schmickermarlen individualresponsetotranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationasafunctionofworkingmemorycapacityandelectrodemontage