Modulating neuronal activity produces specific and long-lasting changes in numerical competence

Roi Cohen Kadosh, Sonja Soskic, Teresa Iuculano, Ryota Kanai, Vincent Walsh, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Sonja Soskic, Teresa Iuculano, Ryota Kanai, Vincent Walsh

Abstract

Around 20% of the population exhibits moderate to severe numerical disabilities [1-3], and a further percentage loses its numerical competence during the lifespan as a result of stroke or degenerative diseases [4]. In this work, we investigated the feasibility of using noninvasive stimulation to the parietal lobe during numerical learning to selectively improve numerical abilities. We used transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS), a method that can selectively inhibit or excitate neuronal populations by modulating GABAergic (anodal stimulation) and glutamatergic (cathodal stimulation) activity [5, 6]. We trained subjects for 6 days with artificial numerical symbols, during which we applied concurrent TDCS to the parietal lobes. The polarity of the brain stimulation specifically enhanced or impaired the acquisition of automatic number processing and the mapping of number into space, both important indices of numerical proficiency [7-9]. The improvement was still present 6 months after the training. Control tasks revealed that the effect of brain stimulation was specific to the representation of artificial numerical symbols. The specificity and longevity of TDCS on numerical abilities establishes TDCS as a realistic tool for intervention in cases of atypical numerical development or loss of numerical abilities because of stroke or degenerative illnesses.

Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A Schematic Outline of the Experimental Design in a Typical Daily Session (A) TDCS was delivered for 20 min from the start of the training. In this case, anodal stimulation was applied to the right parietal lobe (red arrow), whereas cathodal stimulation was delivered to the left parietal lobe (blue arrow). (B) The training continued after the termination of the stimulation. (C and D) Once the training ended, the subjects performed the numerical Stroop task (C) and the number-to-space task (D). The time next to each image reflects the elapsed time from the beginning of the daily session until its termination in a cumulative fashion.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The Congruity Effect for the Artificial Digits, the Cumulative Congruity Effect over Training, and the Congruity Effect for Everyday Digits for the Sham, RC-LA, and RA-LC Groups in the Numerical Stroop Task The data of the artificial digits for each group are averaged across the sessions that showed a significant congruity effect (three sessions for the RA-LC group, two sessions for the sham group, and five sessions for the RC-LA group; note that the latter group showed an abnormal congruity effect that was not changed as a function of learning), and the raw data, which includes RTs in each session for each group, are presented in Table S1. (A) Whereas the RA-LC group and the sham group showed a typical congruity effect, the RC-LA group showed an abnormal effect that mirrored the performance of children at the age of 6 years and might reflect perceptual rather than semantic interference [22]. (B) The cumulative congruity effect demonstrates the emergence of a consistent automatic numerical processing already from the fourth day for the RA-LC group (p = 0.005, Table S1), whereas it occurred only later for the sham group (p = 0.049, Table S1) and did not appear for the RC-LA group. (C) All groups showed a consistent and typical congruity effect for everyday digits (p = 0.00009; group x congruity interaction, p = 0.46), as reflected by slower RTs for the incongruent condition versus the congruent condition. Data are mean ± standard error (SE) of the mean. Note the different scaling in each panel. For a description of the task, see Figure S2.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average Location of Artificial Digits on the Horizontal Segment, Shown Separately for Artificial Digits in the Left Column, Everyday Digits in the Right Column, and Type of Stimulation β represents the selection of the best weight, whether it was logarithmic (βlog) or linear (βlin), in stepwise regression analysis with linear and logarithmic predictors. Data are mean ± SE of the mean. The first row reflects the performance of the RA-LC group (red circles), the middle row reflects the performance of the sham group (black circles), and the bottom row presents the performance of the RC-LA group (blue circles). Whereas the performance with artificial digits was affected by the type of brain stimulation and showed a linear fit only for the RA-LC group, the performance with everyday digits was independent of the type of brain stimulation and showed a linear fit for all the groups. For a description of the task, see Figure S3.

References

    1. Dowker A. Use of derived fact strategies by children with mathematical difficulties. Cogn. Dev. 2009;24:401–410.
    1. Parsons S., Bynner J. NRDC; London: 2005. Does Numeracy Matter More?
    1. Butterworth B. Developmental dyscalculia. In: Campbell J.I.D., editor. Handbook of Mathematical Cognition. Psychology Press; New York: 2004. pp. 455–467.
    1. Willmes K. Chapter 17 acalculia. Handb Clin Neurol. 2008;88:339–358.
    1. Stagg C.J., Best J.G., Stephenson M.C., O'Shea J., Wylezinska M., Kincses Z.T., Morris P.G., Matthews P.M., Johansen-Berg H. Polarity-sensitive modulation of cortical neurotransmitters by transcranial stimulation. J. Neurosci. 2009;29:5202–5206.
    1. Utz K.S., Dimova V., Oppenländer K., Kerkhoff G. Electrified minds: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) as methods of non-invasive brain stimulation in neuropsychology—a review of current data and future implications. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48:2789–2810.
    1. Rubinsten O., Henik A. Developmental dyscalculia: Heterogeneity might not mean different mechanisms. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2009;13:92–99.
    1. Booth J.L., Siegler R.S. Numerical magnitude representations influence arithmetic learning. Child Dev. 2008;79:1016–1031.
    1. Dehaene S., Izard V., Spelke E., Pica P. Log or linear? Distinct intuitions of the number scale in Western and Amazonian indigene cultures. Science. 2008;320:1217–1220.
    1. Bynner J., Parsons S. Basic Skills Agency; London: 1997. Does Numeracy Matter?
    1. Duncan G.J., Dowsett C.J., Claessens A., Magnuson K., Huston A.C., Klebanov P., Pagani L.S., Feinstein L., Engel M., Brooks-Gunn J. School readiness and later achievement. Dev. Psychol. 2007;43:1428–1446.
    1. Beddington J., Cooper C.L., Field J., Goswami U., Huppert F.A., Jenkins R., Jones H.S., Kirkwood T.B.L., Sahakian B.J., Thomas S.M. The mental wealth of nations. Nature. 2008;455:1057–1060.
    1. Price G.R., Holloway I., Räsänen P., Vesterinen M., Ansari D. Impaired parietal magnitude processing in developmental dyscalculia. Curr. Biol. 2007;17:R1042–R1043.
    1. Rotzer S., Kucian K., Martin E., von Aster M., Klaver P., Loenneker T. Optimized voxel-based morphometry in children with developmental dyscalculia. Neuroimage. 2008;39:417–422.
    1. Rykhlevskaia E., Uddin L.Q., Kondos L., Menon V. Neuroanatomical correlates of developmental dyscalculia: Combined evidence from morphometry and tractography. Front Hum Neurosci. 2009;3:51.
    1. Mussolin C., De Volder A., Grandin C., Schlögel X., Nassogne M.C., Noël M.P. Neural correlates of symbolic number comparison in developmental dyscalculia. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2010;22:860–874.
    1. Aydin K., Ucar A., Oguz K.K., Okur O.O., Agayev A., Unal Z., Yilmaz S., Ozturk C. Increased gray matter density in the parietal cortex of mathematicians: A voxel-based morphometry study. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 2007;28:1859–1864.
    1. Witelson S.F., Kigar D.L., Harvey T. The exceptional brain of Albert Einstein. Lancet. 1999;353:2149–2153.
    1. Cantlon J.F., Brannon E.M., Carter E.J., Pelphrey K.A. Functional imaging of numerical processing in adults and 4-y-old children. PLoS Biol. 2006;4:e125.
    1. Hyde D.C., Boas D.A., Blair C., Carey S. Near-infrared spectroscopy shows right parietal specialization for number in pre-verbal infants. Neuroimage. 2010;53:647–652.
    1. Booth J.L., Siegler R.S. Developmental and individual differences in pure numerical estimation. Dev. Psychol. 2006;42:189–201.
    1. Girelli L., Lucangeli D., Butterworth B. The development of automaticity in accessing number magnitude. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2000;76:104–122.
    1. Rubinsten O., Henik A., Berger A., Shahar-Shalev S. The development of internal representations of magnitude and their association with Arabic numerals. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2002;81:74–92.
    1. Cohen Kadosh R., Cohen Kadosh K., Schuhmann T., Kaas A., Goebel R., Henik A., Sack A.T. Virtual dyscalculia induced by parietal-lobe TMS impairs automatic magnitude processing. Curr. Biol. 2007;17:689–693.
    1. Walsh V. A theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2003;7:483–488.
    1. Siegler R.S., Opfer J.E. The development of numerical estimation: Evidence for multiple representations of numerical quantity. Psychol. Sci. 2003;14:237–243.
    1. de Hevia M.D., Spelke E.S. Spontaneous mapping of number and space in adults and young children. Cognition. 2009;110:198–207.
    1. Nitsche M.A., Cohen L.G., Wassermann E.M., Priori A., Lang N., Antal A., Paulus W., Hummel F., Boggio P.S., Fregni F., Pascual-Leone A. Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008. Brain Stimul. 2008;1:206–223.
    1. Tzelgov J., Yehene V., Kotler L., Alon A. Automatic comparisons of artificial digits never compared: Learning linear ordering relations. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2000;26:103–120.
    1. Reber J.C. Implicit learning of artificial grammars. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 1967;6:855–863.
    1. Reis J., Schambra H.M., Cohen L.G., Buch E.R., Fritsch B., Zarahn E., Celnik P.A., Krakauer J.W. Noninvasive cortical stimulation enhances motor skill acquisition over multiple days through an effect on consolidation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:1590–1595.
    1. Fritsch B., Reis J., Martinowich K., Schambra H.M., Ji Y., Cohen L.G., Lu B. Direct current stimulation promotes BDNF-dependent synaptic plasticity: Potential implications for motor learning. Neuron. 2010;66:198–204.
    1. Sandrini M., Rusconi E. A brain for numbers. Cortex. 2009;45:796–803.
    1. Sandrini M., Umiltà C., Rusconi E. The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in cognitive neuroscience: A new synthesis of methodological issues. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2010 in press. Published online June 25, 2010.
    1. Nitsche M.A., Liebetanz D., Schlitterlau A., Henschke U., Fricke K., Frommann K., Lang N., Henning S., Paulus W., Tergau F. GABAergic modulation of DC stimulation-induced motor cortex excitability shifts in humans. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2004;19:2720–2726.
    1. Cohen Kadosh R., Muggleton N., Silvanto J., Walsh V. Double dissociation of format-dependent and number-specific neurons in human parietal cortex. Cereb. Cortex. 2010;20:2166–2171.
    1. Van Opstal F., Verguts T., Orban G.A., Fias W. A hippocampal-parietal network for learning an ordered sequence. Neuroimage. 2008;40:333–341.
    1. Van Opstal F., Fias W., Peigneux P., Verguts T. The neural representation of extensively trained ordered sequences. Neuroimage. 2009;47:367–375.
    1. Cohen Kadosh R., Walsh V. Numerical representation in the parietal lobes: Abstract or not abstract? Behav. Brain Sci. 2009;32:313–328. discussion 328–373.
    1. Grizenko N., Bhat M., Schwartz G., Ter-Stepanian M., Joober R. Efficacy of methylphenidate in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and learning disabilities: A randomized crossover trial. J. Psychiatry Neurosci. 2006;31:46–51.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir