Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T01:24:15.518Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (atDCS) on Sentence Comprehension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2019

Jarrad A. G. Lum Open the ORCID record for Jarrad A. G. Lum [Opens in a new window] ,
Gillian M. Clark ,
Caitlyn M. Rogers ,
James D. Skalkos ,
Ian Fuelscher ,
Christian Hyde  and
Peter G. Enticott
Jarrad A. G. Lum*
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
Gillian M. Clark
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
Caitlyn M. Rogers
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
James D. Skalkos
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
Ian Fuelscher
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
Christian Hyde
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
Peter G. Enticott
Affiliation:
Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to: Jarrad A. G. Lum, Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, School of Psychology, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. E-mail: jarrad.lum@deakin.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: This study examined the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) on sentence and word comprehension in healthy adults. Methods: Healthy adult participants, aged between 19 and 30 years, received either a-tDCS over the left inferior frontal gyrus (n=18) or sham stimulation (n=18). Participants completed sentence comprehension and word comprehension tasks before and during stimulation. Accuracy and reaction times (RTs) were recorded as participants completed both tasks. Results: a-tDCS was found to significantly decrease RT on the sentence comprehension task compared to baseline. There was no change in RT following sham stimulation. a-tDCS was not found to have a significant effect on accuracy. Also, a-tDCS did not affect accuracy or RTs on the word comprehension task. Conclusions: The study provides evidence that non-invasive anodal electrical stimulation can modulate sentence comprehension in healthy adults, at least compared to their baseline performance. (JINS, 2019, 25, 331–335)

Keywords

Non-invasive brain stimulationTranscranial direct current Stimulationa-tDCSSentence comprehensionLeft inferior frontal gyrusWord comprehension
Type
Brief Communication
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , March 2019 , pp. 331 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Cipolotti, L., & Warrington, E.K. (1995). Towards a unitary account of access dysphasia: A single case study. Memory, 3(3-4), 309–332.Google Scholar
Datta, A., Bansal, V., Diaz, J., Patel, J., Reato, D., & Bikson, M. (2009). Gyri-precise head model of transcranial direct current stimulation: Improved spatial focality using a ring electrode versus conventional rectangular pad. Brain Stimulation, 2(4), 201–207. e201.Google Scholar
Giustolisi, B., Vergallito, A., Cecchetto, C., Varoli, E., & Lauro, L.J.R. (2018). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over left inferior frontal gyrus enhances sentence comprehension. Brain and Language, 176, 36–41.Google Scholar
Nitsche, M., & Paulus, W. (2000). Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. The Journal of Physiology, 527(3), 633–639.Google Scholar
Nitsche, M.A, Cohen, L.G, Wassermann, E.M, Priori, A., Lang, N., Antal, A., … Fregni, F. (2008). Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008. Brain Stimulation, 1(3), 206–223.Google Scholar
Ouellet, J., McGirr, A., Van den Eynde, F., Jollant, F., Lepage, M., & Berlim, M.T. (2015). Enhancing decision-making and cognitive impulse control with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied over the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC): A randomized and sham-controlled exploratory study. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 69, 27–34.Google Scholar
Rodd, J.M, Vitello, S., Woollams, A.M, & Adank, P. (2015). Localising semantic and syntactic processing in spoken and written language comprehension: An Activation Likelihood Estimation meta-analysis. Brain and Language, 141, 89–102.Google Scholar
Summers, J.J, Kang, N., & Cauraugh, J.H. (2016). Does transcranial direct current stimulation enhance cognitive and motor functions in the ageing brain? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ageing Research Reviews, 25, 42–54.Google Scholar
Turkeltaub, P.E, Eden, G.F, Jones, K.M, & Zeffiro, T.A. (2002). Meta-analysis of the functional neuroanatomy of single-word reading: Method and validation. NeuroImage, 16(3), 765–780.Google Scholar
Volpato, C., Cavinato, M., Piccione, F., Garzon, M., Meneghello, F., & Birbaumer, N. (2013). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of Broca’s area in chronic aphasia: A controlled outcome study. Behavioural Brain Research, 247, 211–216. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2013.03.029Google Scholar
Waters, G.S, Caplan, D., & Rochon, E. (1995). Processing capacity and sentence comprehension in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 12(1), 1–30.Google Scholar