Stimulating the parietal cortex by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): no effects on attention and memory

Mirela Dubravac; Beat Meier; Mirela Dubravac; Beat Meier

doi:10.3934/Neuroscience.2021002

AIMS Neuroscience

2021, Volume 8, Issue 1: 33-46. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2021002

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Recurring Topics

Stimulating the parietal cortex by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): no effects on attention and memory

Mirela Dubravac ^,,
Beat Meier

Institute of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

Received: 26 September 2020 Accepted: 11 November 2020 Published: 18 November 2020

Selective attention is relevant for goal directed behavior as it allows people to attend to task-relevant target stimuli and to ignore task-irrelevant distractors. Attentional focus at encoding affects subsequent memory for target and distractor stimuli. Remembering selectively more targets than distractors represents memory selectivity. Brain imaging studies suggest that the superior parietal cortex is associated with the dorsal attentional network supporting top-down control of selective attention while the inferior parietal cortex is associated with the ventral attentional network supporting bottom-up attentional orienting. To investigate the roles of the dorsal and ventral networks in the effect of selective attention during encoding on long-term memory, we stimulated the left superior and the right inferior parietal cortex. Building on previous work, we applied transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during a study phase where pictures and words were presented simultaneously and participants had to switch between a picture and a word decision. A subsequent recognition test assessed memory for target and distractor pictures and words. We hypothesized that a relative increase in activity in the dorsal network would boost selective attention while increased activity in the ventral network would impair selective attention. We also expected to find corresponding effects on memory. Enhanced selective attention should lead to higher memory selectivity, while impaired selective attention should lead to lower memory selectivity. Our results replicated that task switching reduced memory selectivity. However, we found no significant effects of tDCS. Thus, the present study questions the effectiveness of the present tDCS protocol for modulating attention during task switching and subsequent memory.
- brain stimulation,
- tDCS,
- parietal cortex,
- attention,
- memory,
- neuronal networks
Citation: Mirela Dubravac, Beat Meier. Stimulating the parietal cortex by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): no effects on attention and memory[J]. AIMS Neuroscience, 2021, 8(1): 33-46. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2021002

Related Papers:

Abstract

Selective attention is relevant for goal directed behavior as it allows people to attend to task-relevant target stimuli and to ignore task-irrelevant distractors. Attentional focus at encoding affects subsequent memory for target and distractor stimuli. Remembering selectively more targets than distractors represents memory selectivity. Brain imaging studies suggest that the superior parietal cortex is associated with the dorsal attentional network supporting top-down control of selective attention while the inferior parietal cortex is associated with the ventral attentional network supporting bottom-up attentional orienting. To investigate the roles of the dorsal and ventral networks in the effect of selective attention during encoding on long-term memory, we stimulated the left superior and the right inferior parietal cortex. Building on previous work, we applied transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during a study phase where pictures and words were presented simultaneously and participants had to switch between a picture and a word decision. A subsequent recognition test assessed memory for target and distractor pictures and words. We hypothesized that a relative increase in activity in the dorsal network would boost selective attention while increased activity in the ventral network would impair selective attention. We also expected to find corresponding effects on memory. Enhanced selective attention should lead to higher memory selectivity, while impaired selective attention should lead to lower memory selectivity. Our results replicated that task switching reduced memory selectivity. However, we found no significant effects of tDCS. Thus, the present study questions the effectiveness of the present tDCS protocol for modulating attention during task switching and subsequent memory.

Acknowledgments

We thank Franziska R. Richter for providing us the study materials. We also thank Andrea Häfliger, Vera von Deschwanden, Valentina Laim, Jana Ach, Nora Moser, and Michel Marbach for testing the participants, and Branislav Savic for his valuable inputs and support regarding the tDCS setup.

Author contributions

MD and BM designed the study. MD programmed the experiment, supervised data collection, and analyzed the data. MD and BM interpreted the results. MD wrote the first draft. BM provided critical revisions. Both authors approved the final version of the article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

[1]	Corbetta M, Shulman GL (2002) Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci 3: 201-215. doi: 10.1038/nrn755
[2]	Shomstein S (2012) Cognitive functions of the posterior parietal cortex: Top-down and bottom-up attentional control. Front Integr Neurosci 6: 38. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00038
[3]	Muhmenthaler MC, Meier B (2019) Task switching hurts memory encoding. Exp Psychol 66: 58-67. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000431
[4]	Muhmenthaler MC, Meier B (2019) Different impact of task switching and response-category conflict on subsequent memory. Psychol Res 83: 1-18. doi: 10.1007/s00426-018-1099-z
[5]	Richter FR, Yeung N (2012) Memory and cognitive control in task switching. Psychol Sci 23: 1256-1263. doi: 10.1177/0956797612444613
[6]	Richter FR, Yeung N (2015) Corresponding influences of top-down control on task switching and long-term memory. Q J Exp Psychol 68: 1124-1147. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.976579
[7]	Reynolds JR, Donaldson DI, Wagner AD, et al. (2004) Item- and task-level processes in the left inferior prefrontal cortex: Positive and negative correlates of encoding. Neuroimage 21: 1472-1483. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.10.033
[8]	Chiu YC, Egner T (2016) Distractor-relevance determines whether task-switching enhances or impairs distractor memory. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 42: 1-5. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000181
[9]	Uncapher MR, Wagner AD (2009) Posterior parietal cortex and episodic encoding: Insights from fMRI subsequent memory effects and dual-attention theory. Neurobiol Learn Mem 91: 139-154. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2008.10.011
[10]	Jacobson L, Goren N, Lavidor M, et al. (2012) Oppositional transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of parietal substrates of attention during encoding modulates episodic memory. Brain Res 1439: 66-72. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.12.036
[11]	Corbetta M, Patel G, Shulman GL (2008) The reorienting system of the human brain: From environment to theory of mind. Neuron 58: 306-324. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2008.04.017
[12]	Davis SW, Wing EA, Cabeza R (2018) Contributions of the ventral parietal cortex to declarative memory. Handb Clin Neurol 151: 525-553. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-63622-5.00027-9
[13]	Hutchinson JB, Uncapher MR, Wagner AD (2009) Posterior parietal cortex and episodic retrieval: Convergent and divergent effects of attention and memory. Learn Mem 16: 343-356. doi: 10.1101/lm.919109
[14]	Uncapher MR, Rugg MD (2009) Selecting for memory? The influence of selective attention on the mnemonic binding of contextual information. J Neurosci 29: 8270-8279. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1043-09.2009
[15]	Monsell S (2003) Task switching. Trends Cogn Sci 7: 134-140. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
[16]	Richter FR, Yeung N (2016) ERP correlates of encoding success and encoding selectivity in attention switching. PLoS One 11: e0167396. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167396
[17]	Padovani T, Koenig T, Eckstein D, et al. (2013) Sustained and transient attentional processes modulate neural predictors of memory encoding in consecutive time periods. Brain Behav 3: 464-475. doi: 10.1002/brb3.150
[18]	Moos K, Vossel S, Weidner R, et al. (2012) Modulation of top-down control of visual attention by cathodal tDCS over right IPS. J Neurosci 32: 16360-16368. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6233-11.2012
[19]	Poldrack RA, Wagner AD, Prull MW, et al. (1999) Functional specialization for semantic and phonological processing in the left inferior prefrontal cortex. Neuroimage 10: 15-35. doi: 10.1006/nimg.1999.0441
[20]	Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9: 97-113. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4
[21]	Fertonani A, Ferrari C, Miniussi C (2015) What do you feel if I apply transcranial electric stimulation? Safety, sensations and secondary induced effects. Clin Neurophysiol 126: 2181-2188. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2015.03.015
[22]	Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, et al. (2011) Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res 63: S240-S252. doi: 10.1002/acr.20543
[23]	Rogers RD, Monsell S (1995) Costs of a predictible switch between simple cognitive tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen 124: 207-231. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207
[24]	Meier B, Rey-Mermet A, Rothen N, et al. (2013) Recognition memory across the lifespan: The impact of word frequency and study-test interval on estimates of familiarity and recollection. Front Psychol 4: 1-15.
[25]	Tulving E (1985) Memory and consciousness. Can Psychol 26: 1-12. doi: 10.1037/h0080017
[26]	Standing L (1973) Learning 10000 pictures. Q J Exp Psychol 25: 207-222. doi: 10.1080/14640747308400340
[27]	Wagenmakers EJ, Love J, Marsman M, et al. (2018) Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP. Psychon Bull Rev 25: 58-76. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1323-7
[28]	Kim K, Ekstrom AD, Tandon N (2016) A network approach for modulating memory processes via direct and indirect brain stimulation: Toward a causal approach for the neural basis of memory. Neurobiol Learn Mem 134: 162-177. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2016.04.001
[29]	Roy LB, Sparing R, Fink GR, et al. (2015) Modulation of attention functions by anodal tDCS on right PPC. Neuropsychologia 74: 96-107. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.02.028
[30]	Coffman BA, Clark VP, Parasuraman R (2014) Battery powered thought: Enhancement of attention, learning, and memory in healthy adults using transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroimage 85: 895-908. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.083
[31]	Thair H, Holloway AL, Newport R, et al. (2017) Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): A Beginner's guide for design and implementation. Front Neurosci 11: 1-13. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00641
[32]	Krause B, Kadosh RC (2014) Not all brains are created equal: The relevance of individual differences in responsiveness to transcranial electrical stimulation. Front Syst Neurosci 8: 25.
[33]	Imburgio MJ, Orr JM (2018) Effects of prefrontal tDCS on executive function: Methodological considerations revealed by meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia 117: 156-166. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.04.022
[34]	Leite J, Carvalho S, Fregni F, et al. (2011) Task-specific effects of tDCS-induced cortical excitability changes on cognitive and motor sequence set shifting performance. PLoS One 6: e24140. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024140
[35]	Galli G, Vadillo MA, Sirota M, et al. (2019) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on episodic memory. Brain Stimul 12: 231-241. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2018.11.008
[36]	Coffman BA, Trumbo MC, Flores RA, et al. (2012) Impact of tDCS on performance and learning of target detection: Interaction with stimulus characteristics and experimental design. Neuropsychologia 50: 1594-1602. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.03.012
[37]	Filmer HL, Ehrhardt SE, Bollmann S, et al. (2019) Accounting for individual differences in the response to tDCS with baseline levels of neurochemical excitability. Cortex 115: 324-334. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2019.02.012
[38]	Meier B, Sauter P (2018) Boosting memory by tDCS to frontal or parietal brain regions? A study of the enactment effect shows no effects for immediate and delayed recognition. Front Psychol 9: 1-8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00867
[39]	Savic B, Cazzoli D, Müri R, et al. (2017) No effects of transcranial DLPFC stimulation on implicit task sequence learning and consolidation. Sci Rep 7: 1-10. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-10128-0
[40]	Savic B, Müri R, Meier B (2017) A single session of prefrontal cortex transcranial direct current stimulation does not modulate implicit task sequence learning and consolidation. Brain Stimul 10: 567-575. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2017.01.001
[41]	Savic B, Müri R, Meier B (2019) High definition transcranial direct current stimulation does not modulate implicit task sequence learning and consolidation. Neuroscience 414: 77-87. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2019.06.034

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)