Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) facilitates overall visual search response times but does not interact with visual search task factors

Towards optimized methodological parameters for maximizing the behavioral effects of transcranial direct current stimulation

Introduction

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) administers low-intensity direct current electrical stimulation to brain regions via electrodes arranged on the surface of the scalp. The core promise of tDCS is its ability to modulate brain activity and affect performance on diverse cognitive functions (affording causal inferences regarding regional brain activity and behavior), but the optimal methodological parameters for maximizing behavioral effects remain to be elucidated. Here we sought to examine the effects of 10 stimulation and experimental design factors across a series of five cognitive domains: motor performance, visual search, working memory, vigilance, and response inhibition. The objective was to identify a set of optimal parameter settings that consistently and reliably maximized the behavioral effects of tDCS within each cognitive domain.

Methods

We surveyed tDCS effects on these various cognitive functions in healthy young adults, ultimately resulting in 721 effects across 106 published reports. Hierarchical Bayesian meta-regression models were fit to characterize how (and to what extent) these design parameters differentially predict the likelihood of positive/negative behavioral outcomes.

Results

Consistent with many previous meta-analyses of tDCS effects, extensive variability was observed across tasks and measured outcomes. Consequently, most design parameters did not confer consistent advantages or disadvantages to behavioral effects-a domain-general model suggested an advantage to using within-subjects designs (versus between-subjects) and the tendency for cathodal stimulation (relative to anodal stimulation) to produce reduced behavioral effects, but these associations were scarcely-evident in domain-specific models.

Discussion

These findings highlight the urgent need for tDCS studies to more systematically probe the effects of these parameters on behavior to fulfill the promise of identifying causal links between brain function and cognition.

No effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on visual evoked potential and peak gamma frequency

Evidence suggests that the visual evoked potential (VEP) and gamma oscillations elicited by visual stimuli reflect the balance of excitatory and inhibitory (E-I) cortical processes. As tDCS has been shown to modulate E-I balance, the current study investigated whether amplitudes of VEP components (N1 and P2) and peak gamma frequency are modulated by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Healthy adults underwent two electroencephalography (EEG) recordings while viewing stimuli designed to elicit a robust visual response. Between the two recordings, participants were randomly assigned to three tDCS conditions (anodal-, cathodal-, and sham-tDCS) or received no-tDCS. tDCS electrodes were placed over the occipital cortex (Oz) and the left cheek with an intensity of 2 mA for 10 min. Data of 39 participants were analysed for VEP amplitudes and peak gamma frequency using mixed-model ANOVAs. The results showed no main effects of tDCS in any metric. Possible explanations for the absence of tDCS effects are discussed.

Converging Evidence That Neural Plasticity Underlies Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation

It is not definitely known how direct-current stimulation causes its long-lasting effects. Here, we tested the hypothesis that the long time course of transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is because of the electrical field increasing the plasticity of the brain tissue. If this is the case, then we should see tDCS effects when humans need to encode information into long-term memory, but not at other times. We tested this hypothesis by delivering tDCS to the ventral visual stream of human participants during different tasks (i.e., recognition memory vs. visual search) and at different times during a memory task. We found that tDCS improved memory encoding, and the neural correlates thereof, but not retrieval. We also found that tDCS did not change the efficiency of information processing during visual search for a certain target object, a task that does not require the formation of new connections in the brain but instead relies on attention and object recognition mechanisms. Thus, our findings support the hypothesis that direct-current stimulation modulates brain activity by changing the underlying plasticity of the tissue.