Cargando…

The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming

Processing ambiguous situations is a constant challenge in everyday life and sensory input from different modalities needs to be integrated to form a coherent mental representation on the environment. The bouncing/streaming illusion can be studied to provide insights into the ambiguous perception an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Friehs, Maximilian A., Stegemann, Marlena J., Merz, Simon, Geißler, Christoph, Meyerhoff, Hauke S., Frings, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9870834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36357591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-022-06505-5
_version_ 1784877055074107392
author Friehs, Maximilian A.
Stegemann, Marlena J.
Merz, Simon
Geißler, Christoph
Meyerhoff, Hauke S.
Frings, Christian
author_facet Friehs, Maximilian A.
Stegemann, Marlena J.
Merz, Simon
Geißler, Christoph
Meyerhoff, Hauke S.
Frings, Christian
author_sort Friehs, Maximilian A.
collection PubMed
description Processing ambiguous situations is a constant challenge in everyday life and sensory input from different modalities needs to be integrated to form a coherent mental representation on the environment. The bouncing/streaming illusion can be studied to provide insights into the ambiguous perception and processing of multi-modal environments. In short, the likelihood of reporting bouncing rather than streaming impressions increases when a sound coincides with the moment of overlap between two moving disks. Neuroimaging studies revealed that the right posterior parietal cortex is crucial in cross-modal integration and is active during the bouncing/streaming illusion. Consequently, in the present study, we used transcranial direct current stimulation to stimulate this brain area. In the active stimulation conditions, a 9 cm(2) electrode was positioned over the P4-EEG position and the 35 cm(2) reference positioned over the left upper arm. The stimulation lasted 15 min. Each participant did the bouncing/streaming task three times: before, during and after anodal or sham stimulation. In a sample of N = 60 healthy, young adults, we found no influence of anodal tDCS. Bayesian analysis showed strong evidence against tDCS effects. There are two possible explanations for the finding that anodal tDCS over perceptual areas did not modulate multimodal integration. First, upregulation of multimodal integration is not possible using tDCS over the PPC as the integration process already functions at maximum capacity. Second, prefrontal decision-making areas may have overruled any modulated input from the PPC as it may not have matched their decision-making criterion and compensated for the modulation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9870834
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98708342023-01-25 The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming Friehs, Maximilian A. Stegemann, Marlena J. Merz, Simon Geißler, Christoph Meyerhoff, Hauke S. Frings, Christian Exp Brain Res Research Article Processing ambiguous situations is a constant challenge in everyday life and sensory input from different modalities needs to be integrated to form a coherent mental representation on the environment. The bouncing/streaming illusion can be studied to provide insights into the ambiguous perception and processing of multi-modal environments. In short, the likelihood of reporting bouncing rather than streaming impressions increases when a sound coincides with the moment of overlap between two moving disks. Neuroimaging studies revealed that the right posterior parietal cortex is crucial in cross-modal integration and is active during the bouncing/streaming illusion. Consequently, in the present study, we used transcranial direct current stimulation to stimulate this brain area. In the active stimulation conditions, a 9 cm(2) electrode was positioned over the P4-EEG position and the 35 cm(2) reference positioned over the left upper arm. The stimulation lasted 15 min. Each participant did the bouncing/streaming task three times: before, during and after anodal or sham stimulation. In a sample of N = 60 healthy, young adults, we found no influence of anodal tDCS. Bayesian analysis showed strong evidence against tDCS effects. There are two possible explanations for the finding that anodal tDCS over perceptual areas did not modulate multimodal integration. First, upregulation of multimodal integration is not possible using tDCS over the PPC as the integration process already functions at maximum capacity. Second, prefrontal decision-making areas may have overruled any modulated input from the PPC as it may not have matched their decision-making criterion and compensated for the modulation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-11-10 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9870834/ /pubmed/36357591 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-022-06505-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research Article
Friehs, Maximilian A.
Stegemann, Marlena J.
Merz, Simon
Geißler, Christoph
Meyerhoff, Hauke S.
Frings, Christian
The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming
title The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming
title_full The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming
title_fullStr The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming
title_full_unstemmed The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming
title_short The influence of tDCS on perceived bouncing/streaming
title_sort influence of tdcs on perceived bouncing/streaming
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9870834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36357591
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-022-06505-5
work_keys_str_mv AT friehsmaximiliana theinfluenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT stegemannmarlenaj theinfluenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT merzsimon theinfluenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT geißlerchristoph theinfluenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT meyerhoffhaukes theinfluenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT fringschristian theinfluenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT friehsmaximiliana influenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT stegemannmarlenaj influenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT merzsimon influenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT geißlerchristoph influenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT meyerhoffhaukes influenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming
AT fringschristian influenceoftdcsonperceivedbouncingstreaming