Transcranial random noise stimulation mitigates increased difficulty in an arithmetic learning task

Tudor Popescu, Beatrix Krause, Devin B Terhune, Olivia Twose, Thomas Page, Glyn Humphreys, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Tudor Popescu, Beatrix Krause, Devin B Terhune, Olivia Twose, Thomas Page, Glyn Humphreys, Roi Cohen Kadosh

Abstract

Proficiency in arithmetic learning can be achieved by using a multitude of strategies, the most salient of which are procedural learning (applying a certain set of computations) and rote learning (direct retrieval from long-term memory). Here we investigated the effect of transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS), a non-invasive brain stimulation method previously shown to enhance cognitive training, on both types of learning in a 5-day sham-controlled training study, under two conditions of task difficulty, defined in terms of item repetition. On the basis of previous research implicating the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortex in early and late stages of arithmetic learning, respectively, sham-controlled tRNS was applied to bilateral prefrontal cortex for the first 3 days and to the posterior parietal cortex for the last 2 days of a 5-day training phase. The training involved learning to solve arithmetic problems by applying a calculation algorithm; both trained and untrained problems were used in a brief testing phase at the end of the training phase. Task difficulty was manipulated between subjects by using either a large ("easy" condition) or a small ("difficult" condition) number of repetition of problems during training. Measures of attention and working memory were acquired before and after the training phase. As compared to sham, participants in the tRNS condition displayed faster reaction times and increased learning rate during the training phase; as well as faster reaction times for both trained and untrained (new) problems, which indicated a transfer effect after the end of training. All stimulation effects reached significance only in the "difficult" condition when number of repetition was lower. There were no transfer effects of tRNS on attention or working memory. The results support the view that tRNS can produce specific facilitative effects on numerical cognition--specifically, on arithmetic learning. They also highlight the importance of task difficulty in the neuromodulation of learning, which in the current study due to the manipulation of item repetition might have being mediated by the memory system.

Keywords: Cognitive training; Mental arithmetic; Posterior parietal cortex; Prefrontal cortex; Task difficulty; Transcranial random noise stimulation.

Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Structure of a trial for each type of problem (left panel: Drill; right panel: Calculation).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
RTs on Calculation trials, as a function of Difficulty and Stimulation Group. Data is collapsed across all five training sessions. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. * p<.05, ** p<.01.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Calculation RT distributions for the (a) easy and (b) difficult conditions as a function of Stimulation Group. Data points represent the mean proportion of responses across participants, within 500 ms-wide bins. (c) The ex-Gaussian parameters – µ (mu), σ (sigma) and τ (tau) – that describe these distributions as a function of Difficulty and Stimulation Group. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. * p<.05, ** p<.01.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
(a) RTs and (b) accuracy on Calculation problems in the testing phase, as a function of (a) Difficulty and Stimulation Group or (b) Difficulty, Stimulation Group and Problem Novelty. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. * p<.05.

References

    1. Ambrus G.G., Paulus W., Antal A. Cutaneous perception thresholds of electrical stimulation methods: Comparison of tDCS and tRNS. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2010;121(11):1908–1914.
    1. Ansari D., Garcia N., Lucas E., Hamon K., Dhital B. Neural correlates of symbolic number processing in children and adults. Neuroreport. 2005;16(16):1769–1773.
    1. Arsalidou M., Taylor M.J. Is 2+2=4? Meta-analyses of brain areas needed for numbers and calculations. NeuroImage. 2011;54(3):2382–2393.
    1. Balota D.A., Yap M.J. Moving beyond the mean in studies of mental chronometry the power of response time distributional analyses. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2011;20(3):160–166.
    1. Beddington J., Cooper C.L., Field J., Goswami U., Huppert F.A., Jenkins R., Thomas S.M. The mental wealth of nations. Nature. 2008;455(7216):1057–1060.
    1. Bjork R.A. Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In: Metcalfe J., Shimamura A.P., editors. Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. The MIT Press; Cambridge, MA, US: 1994. pp. 185–205.
    1. Brem A.-K., Fried P.J., Horvath J.C., Robertson E.M., Pascual-Leone A. Is neuroenhancement by noninvasive brain stimulation a net zero-sum proposition? NeuroImage. 2014;85(Part 3):1058–1068.
    1. Butterworth B. Handbook of Mathematical Cognition; New York: 2005. Developmental Dyscalculia; pp. 455–467.
    1. Campbell J., Penner-Wilger M. Calculation latency: the μ of memory and the τ of transformation. Mem. Cogn. 2006;34(1):217–226.
    1. Cappelletti M., Gessaroli E., Hithersay R., Mitolo M., Didino D., Kanai R., Walsh V. Transfer of cognitive training across magnitude dimensions achieved with concurrent brain stimulation of the parietal lobe. J. Neurosci. 2013;33(37):14899–14907.
    1. Chaieb L., Paulus W., Antal A. Evaluating aftereffects of short-duration transcranial random noise stimulation on cortical excitability. Neural Plast. 2011;2011
    1. Chein J.M., Schneider W. The brain's learning and control architecture. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2012;21(2):78–84.
    1. Cho S., Metcalfe A.W.S., Young C.B., Ryali S., Geary D.C., Menon V. Hippocampal–prefrontal engagement and dynamic causal interactions in the maturation of children's fact retrieval. J. Cognit. Neurosci. 2012;24(9):1849–1866.
    1. Cohen Kadosh R., Soskic S., Iuculano T., Kanai R., Walsh V. Modulating neuronal activity produces specific and long-lasting changes in numerical competence. Curr. Biol. 2010;20(22):2016–2020. .
    1. Cohen Kadosh R., Walsh V. Dyscalculia. Curr. Biol. 2007;17(22):R946–R947.
    1. Cohen Kadosh R., Walsh V. Numerical representation in the parietal lobes: abstract or not abstract? Behav. Brain Sci. 2009;32(3–4):313–328.
    1. Cowan N., Saults J.S. When does a good working memory counteract proactive interference? Surprising evidence from a probe recognition task. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 2013;142(1):12.
    1. Delazer M., Domahs F., Bartha L., Brenneis C., Lochy A., Trieb T., Benke T. Learning complex arithmetic—an fMRI study. Cognit. Brain Res. 2003;18(1):76–88.
    1. Delazer M., Ischebeck A., Domahs F., Zamarian L., Koppelstaetter F., Siedentopf C.M., Felber S. Learning by strategies and learning by drill–evidence from an fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2005;25(3):838–849.
    1. Fan J., McCandliss B.D., Sommer T., Raz A., Posner M.I. Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. J. Cognit. Neurosci. 2002;14(3):340–347.
    1. Fertonani A., Ferrari C., Miniussi C. What do you feel if I apply transcranial electric stimulation? Safety, sensations and secondary induced effects. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2015;126:2181–2188.
    1. Fertonani A., Pirulli C., Miniussi C. Random noise stimulation improves neuroplasticity in perceptual learning. J. Neurosci. 2011;31(43):15416–15423.
    1. Gill J., Shah-Basak P.P., Hamilton R. It's the thought that counts: examining the task-dependent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on executive function. Brain Stimul. 2015;8(2):253–259.
    1. Grabner R.H., Ansari D., Koschutnig K., Reishofer G., Ebner F., Neuper C. To retrieve or to calculate? Left angular gyrus mediates the retrieval of arithmetic facts during problem solving. Neuropsychologia. 2009;47(2):604–608.
    1. Heathcote A. RTSYS: a DOS application for the analysis of reaction time data. Behav. Res. Methods. 1996;28(3):427–445.
    1. Heathcote A., Popiel S.J., Mewhort D.J. Analysis of response time distributions: an example using the Stroop task. Psychol. Bull. 1991;109(2):340–347.
    1. Heinzel S., Lorenz R.C., Brockhaus W.-R., Wüstenberg T., Kathmann N., Heinz A., Rapp M.A. Working memory load-dependent brain response predicts behavioral training gains in older adults. J. Neurosci. 2014;34(4):1224–1233.
    1. Holloway I.D., Ansari D. Developmental Specialization in the Right Intraparietal Sulcus for the Abstract Representation of Numerical Magnitude. J. Cognit. Neurosci. 2009;22(11):2627–2637.
    1. Ischebeck A., Zamarian L., Egger K., Schocke M., Delazer M. Imaging early practice effects in arithmetic. NeuroImage. 2007;36(3):993–1003.
    1. Ischebeck A., Zamarian L., Schocke M., Delazer M. Flexible transfer of knowledge in mental arithmetic — An fMRI study. NeuroImage. 2009;44(3):1103–1112.
    1. Iuculano T., Cohen Kadosh R. The mental cost of cognitive enhancement. J. Neurosci. 2013;33(10):4482–4486.
    1. Kawashima R., Taira M., Okita K., Inoue K., Tajima N., Yoshida H., Fukuda H. A functional MRI study of simple arithmetic—a comparison between children and adults. Cognit. Brain Res. 2004;18(3):227–233.
    1. Kucian K., von Aster M., Loenneker T., Dietrich T., Martin E. Development of neural networks for exact and approximate calculation: a fMRI study. Dev. Neuropsychol. 2008;33(4):447–473.
    1. Lacouture Y., Cousineau D. How to use MATLAB to fit the ex-Gaussian and other probability functions to a distribution of response times. Tutorials Quant. Methods Psychol. 2008;4(1):35–45.
    1. LeFevre J.-A., DeStefano D., Penner-Wilger M., Daley K.E. Selection of procedures in mental subtraction. Can. J. Exp. Psychol./Rev. Can. De. Psychol. Expérimentale. 2006;60(3):209–220.
    1. Luce R.D. Oxford University Press; Oxford: 1986. Response Times and Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization.
    1. McVay J.C., Kane M.J. Drifting from slow to ‘d'oh!’: Working memory capacity and mind wandering predict extreme reaction times and executive control errors. J. Exp. Psychol.: Learn., Mem., Cogn. 2012;38(3):525.
    1. Moeller K., Willmes K., Klein E. A review on functional and structural brain connectivity in numerical cognition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2015;9 Retrieved from.
    1. Nagel I.E., Preuschhof C., Li S.-C., Nyberg L., Bäckman L., Lindenberger U., Heekeren H.R. Load modulation of BOLD response and connectivity predicts working memory performance in younger and older adults. J. Cognit. Neurosci. 2011;23(8):2030–2045.
    1. Newell, A., Rosenbloom, P.S., 1981. Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Cognitive skills and their acquisition.
    1. Parsons, S., Bynner, J., 2005. Does numeracy matter more? National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy.
    1. Pauli P., Lutzenberger W., Rau H., Birbaumer N., Rickard T.C., Yaroush R.A., Bourne L.E., Jr. Brain potentials during mental arithmetic: effects of extensive practice and problem difficulty. Cognit. Brain Res. 1994;2(1):21–29.
    1. Pesenti M., Zago L., Crivello F., Mellet E., Samson D., Duroux B., Tzourio-Mazoyer N. Mental calculation in a prodigy is sustained by right prefrontal and medial temporal areas. Nat. Neurosci. 2001;4(1):103–108.
    1. Pfurtscheller G., Bauernfeind G., Wriessnegger S.C., Neuper C. Focal frontal (de)oxyhemoglobin responses during simple arithmetic. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 2010;76(3):186–192.
    1. Pope P.A., Miall R.C. Task-specific facilitation of cognition by cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the cerebellum. Brain Stimul. 2012;5(2):84–94.
    1. Price G.R., Ansari D. Symbol processing in the left angular gyrus: evidence from passive perception of digits. NeuroImage. 2011;57(3):1205–1211.
    1. Prichard G., Weiller C., Fritsch B., Reis J. Effects of different electrical brain stimulation protocols on subcomponents of motor skill learning. Brain Stimul. 2014
    1. Ratcliff R. Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin. 1979;86(3):446.
    1. Rickard T.C. Bending the power law: a CMPL theory of strategy shifts and the automatization of cognitive skills. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 1997;126(3):288–311.
    1. Rivera S.M., Reiss A.L., Eckert M.A., Menon V. Developmental changes in mental arithmetic: evidence for increased functional specialization in the left inferior parietal cortex. Cereb. Cortex. 2005;15(11):1779–1790.
    1. Rosenberg-Lee M., Barth M., Menon V. What difference does a year of schooling make? Maturation of brain response and connectivity between 2nd and 3rd grades during arithmetic problem solving. NeuroImage. 2011;57(3):796–808.
    1. Rütsche B., Hauser T.U., Jäncke L., Grabner R.H. When problem size matters: differential effects of brain stimulation on arithmetic problem solving and neural oscillations. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0120665.
    1. Sarkar A., Dowker A., Cohen Kadosh R. Cognitive enhancement or cognitive cost: trait-specific outcomes of brain stimulation in the case of mathematics anxiety. J. Neurosci. 2014;34(50):16605–16610.
    1. Schmiedek F., Oberauer K., Wilhelm O., Süß H.-M., Wittmann W.W. Individual differences in components of reaction time distributions and their relations to working memory and intelligence. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 2007;136(3):414–429.
    1. Shahar N., Meiran N. Learning to control actions: transfer effects following a procedural cognitive control computerized training. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(3):e0119992.
    1. Shahar N., Teodorescu A.R., Usher M., Pereg M., Meiran N. Selective influence of working memory load on exceptionally slow reaction times. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 2014;143(5):1837.
    1. Shalev R.S., Unit N., Zedek S., Berlin G.R.C.H. Number development and developmental dyscalculia. Dev. Med. Child. Neurol. 2007;49:868–873.
    1. Silvanto J., Muggleton N., Walsh V. State-dependency in brain stimulation studies of perception and cognition. Trends Cognit. Sci. 2008;12(12):447–454. .
    1. Snowball A., Tachtsidis I., Popescu T., Thompson J., Delazer M., Zamarian L., Cohen Kadosh R. Long-term enhancement of brain function and cognition using cognitive training and brain stimulation. Curr. Biol. 2013;23:987–992.
    1. Stanescu-Cosson R., Pinel P., Moortele P.-F., van de, Bihan D.L., Cohen L., Dehaene S. Understanding dissociations in dyscalculia A brain imaging study of the impact of number size on the cerebral networks for exact and approximate calculation. Brain. 2000;123(11):2240–2255.
    1. Tanida M., Sakatani K., Takano R., Tagai K. Relation between asymmetry of prefrontal cortex activities and the autonomic nervous system during a mental arithmetic task: near infrared spectroscopy study. Neurosci. Lett. 2004;369(1):69–74.
    1. Terney D., Chaieb L., Moliadze V., Antal A., Paulus W. Increasing human brain excitability by transcranial high-frequency random noise stimulation. J. Neurosci. 2008;28(52):14147–14155.
    1. Warr P.B. Repetition and task difficulty. Nature. 1964;202(4930)
    1. Wechsler D. The Psychological Corporation; San Antonio, TX: 1997. WAIS-III/WMS-III Technical Manual.
    1. Zamarian L., Ischebeck A., Delazer M. Neuroscience of learning arithmetic-evidence from brain imaging studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2009;33(6):909–925.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever