Encoding/retrieval dissociation of false recognition with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the left temporal lobe

Transcranial direct current stimulation over the left anterior temporal lobe during memory retrieval differentially affects true and false recognition in the DRM task

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of non-invasive brain stimulation that has been used to modulate human brain activity and cognition. One area which has not yet been extensively explored using tDCS is the generation of false memories. In this study, we combined the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) task with stimulation of the left anterior temporal lobe (ATL) during retrieval. This area has been shown to be involved in semantic processing in general and retrieval of false memories in the DRM paradigm in particular. During stimulation, 0.7 mA were applied via a 9 cm² electrode over the left ATL, with the 35 cm² return electrode placed over the left deltoid. We contrasted the effects of cathodal, anodal, and sham stimulation, which were applied in the recognition phase of the experiment on a sample of 78 volunteers. Results showed impaired recognition of true memories after both anodal and cathodal stimulation in comparison to sham stimulation, suggesting a reduced signal-to-noise ratio. In addition, the results revealed enhanced false recognition of concept lure items during cathodal stimulation compared to anodal stimulation, indicating a polarity-dependent impact of tDCS on false memories in the DRM task. The pathway by which tDCS modulated false recognition remains unclear: stimulation may have changed the activation of irrelevant lures or affected the weighting and monitoring of lure activations. Nevertheless, these results are a first step towards using brain stimulation to decrease false memories. Practical implications of the findings for real-life settings, for example, in the courtroom, need to be addressed in future work.

Cerebellum and semantic memory: A TMS study using the DRM paradigm

Traditionally, the cerebellum has been linked to motor functions, but recent evidence suggest that it is also involved in a wide range of cognitive processes. Given the uniformity of cerebellar cortex microstructure, it has been proposed that the same computational process might underlie cerebellar involvement in both motor and cognitive functions. Within motor functions, the cerebellum it is involved in procedural memory and associative learning. Here, we hypothesized that the cerebellum may participate to semantic memory as well. To test whether the cerebellum is causally involved in semantic memory, we carried out two experiments in which participants performed the Deese-Roediger-McDermott paradigm (DRM) while online transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was administered over the right cerebellum or over a control site. In Experiment 1, cerebellar TMS selectively affected participants' discriminability for critical lures without affecting participants' discriminability for unrelated words and in Experiment 2 we found that the higher was the semantic association between new and studied words, the higher was the memory impairment caused by the TMS. These results indicate that the right cerebellum is causally involved in semantic memory and provide evidence consistent with theories that proposed the existence of a unified cerebellar function within motor and cognitive domains, as well with recent perspectives about cerebellar involvement in semantic memory and predictive functions.

Null Effects on Working Memory and Verbal Fluency Tasks When Applying Anodal tDCS to the Inferior Frontal Gyrus of Healthy Participants

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a technique used to modify cognition by modulating underlying cortical excitability via weak electric current applied through the scalp. Although many studies have reported positive effects with tDCS, a number of recent studies highlight that tDCS effects can be small and difficult to reproduce. This is especially the case when attempting to modulate performance using single applications of tDCS in healthy participants. Possible reasons may be that optimal stimulation parameters have yet to be identified, and that individual variation in cortical activity and/or level of ability confound outcomes. To address these points, we carried out a series of experiments in which we attempted to modulate performance in fluency and working memory probe tasks using stimulation parameters which have been associated with positive outcomes: we targeted the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG) and compared performance when applying a 1.5 mA anodal current for 25 min and with sham stimulation. There is evidence that LIFG plays a role in these tasks and previous studies have found positive effects of stimulation. We also compared our experimental group (N = 19–20) with a control group receiving no stimulation (n = 24). More importantly, we also considered effects on subgroups subdivided according to memory span as well as to more direct measures of executive function abilities and motivational levels. We found no systematic effect of stimulation. Our findings are in line with a growing body of evidence that tDCS produces unreliable effects. We acknowledge that our findings speak to the conditions we investigated, and that alternative protocols (e.g., multiple sessions, clinical samples, and different stimulation polarities) may be more effective. We encourage further research to explore optimal conditions for tDCS efficacy, given the potential benefits that this technique poses for understanding and enhancing cognition.