Inconsistent effects of parietal α-tACS on Pseudoneglect across two experiments: A failed internal replication

Domenica Veniero, Christopher S.Y. Benwell, Merle M. Ahrens, Gregor Thut

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)
75 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is being investigated as an experimental and clinical interventional technique in human participants. While promising, important limitations have been identified, including weak effect sizes and high inter- and intra-individual variability of outcomes. Here, we compared two "inhibitory" tES-techniques with supposedly different mechanisms of action as to their effects on performance in a visuospatial attention task, and report on a direct replication attempt. In two experiments, 2 × 20 healthy participants underwent tES in three separate sessions testing different protocols (10 min stimulation each) with a montage targeting right parietal cortex (right parietal-left frontal, electrode-sizes: 3cm × 3cm-7 cm × 5 cm), while performing a perceptual line bisection (landmark) task. The tES-protocols were compared as to their ability to modulate pseudoneglect (thought to be under right hemispheric control). In experiment 1, sham-tES was compared to transcranial alternating current stimulation at alpha frequency (10 Hz; α-tACS) (expected to entrain "inhibitory" alpha oscillations) and to cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) (shown to suppress neuronal spiking activity). In experiment 2, we attempted to replicate the findings of experiment 1, and establish frequency-specificity by adding a 45 Hz-tACS condition to α-tACS and sham. In experiment 1, right parietal α-tACS led to the expected changes in spatial attention bias, namely a rightward shift in subjective midpoint estimation (relative to sham). However, this was not confirmed in experiment 2 and in the complete sample. Right parietal c-tDCS and 45 Hz-tACS had no effect. These results highlight the importance of replication studies, adequate statistical power and optimizing tES-interventions for establishing the robustness and reliability of electrical stimulation effects, and best practice.

Original languageEnglish
Article number952
Number of pages14
JournalFrontiers in Psychology
Volume8
Issue numberJUN
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 8 Jun 2017

Fingerprint

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Parietal Lobe
Aptitude
Practice Guidelines
Electric Stimulation
Healthy Volunteers
Electrodes

Keywords

  • Landmark task
  • Replication
  • TACS
  • TDCS
  • TES reliability

Cite this

@article{37c3248eb5aa4db9a09f6012309e6063,
title = "Inconsistent effects of parietal α-tACS on Pseudoneglect across two experiments: A failed internal replication",
abstract = "Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is being investigated as an experimental and clinical interventional technique in human participants. While promising, important limitations have been identified, including weak effect sizes and high inter- and intra-individual variability of outcomes. Here, we compared two {"}inhibitory{"} tES-techniques with supposedly different mechanisms of action as to their effects on performance in a visuospatial attention task, and report on a direct replication attempt. In two experiments, 2 × 20 healthy participants underwent tES in three separate sessions testing different protocols (10 min stimulation each) with a montage targeting right parietal cortex (right parietal-left frontal, electrode-sizes: 3cm × 3cm-7 cm × 5 cm), while performing a perceptual line bisection (landmark) task. The tES-protocols were compared as to their ability to modulate pseudoneglect (thought to be under right hemispheric control). In experiment 1, sham-tES was compared to transcranial alternating current stimulation at alpha frequency (10 Hz; α-tACS) (expected to entrain {"}inhibitory{"} alpha oscillations) and to cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) (shown to suppress neuronal spiking activity). In experiment 2, we attempted to replicate the findings of experiment 1, and establish frequency-specificity by adding a 45 Hz-tACS condition to α-tACS and sham. In experiment 1, right parietal α-tACS led to the expected changes in spatial attention bias, namely a rightward shift in subjective midpoint estimation (relative to sham). However, this was not confirmed in experiment 2 and in the complete sample. Right parietal c-tDCS and 45 Hz-tACS had no effect. These results highlight the importance of replication studies, adequate statistical power and optimizing tES-interventions for establishing the robustness and reliability of electrical stimulation effects, and best practice.",
keywords = "Landmark task, Replication, TACS, TDCS, TES reliability",
author = "Domenica Veniero and Benwell, {Christopher S.Y.} and Ahrens, {Merle M.} and Gregor Thut",
note = "This work was supported by a Wellcome Trust Award to Gregor Thut [grant number 098434].",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "8",
doi = "10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00952",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Frontiers in Psychology",
issn = "1664-1078",
publisher = "Frontiers Media",
number = "JUN",

}

Inconsistent effects of parietal α-tACS on Pseudoneglect across two experiments : A failed internal replication. / Veniero, Domenica; Benwell, Christopher S.Y.; Ahrens, Merle M.; Thut, Gregor.

In: Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, No. JUN, 952, 08.06.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inconsistent effects of parietal α-tACS on Pseudoneglect across two experiments

T2 - A failed internal replication

AU - Veniero, Domenica

AU - Benwell, Christopher S.Y.

AU - Ahrens, Merle M.

AU - Thut, Gregor

N1 - This work was supported by a Wellcome Trust Award to Gregor Thut [grant number 098434].

PY - 2017/6/8

Y1 - 2017/6/8

N2 - Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is being investigated as an experimental and clinical interventional technique in human participants. While promising, important limitations have been identified, including weak effect sizes and high inter- and intra-individual variability of outcomes. Here, we compared two "inhibitory" tES-techniques with supposedly different mechanisms of action as to their effects on performance in a visuospatial attention task, and report on a direct replication attempt. In two experiments, 2 × 20 healthy participants underwent tES in three separate sessions testing different protocols (10 min stimulation each) with a montage targeting right parietal cortex (right parietal-left frontal, electrode-sizes: 3cm × 3cm-7 cm × 5 cm), while performing a perceptual line bisection (landmark) task. The tES-protocols were compared as to their ability to modulate pseudoneglect (thought to be under right hemispheric control). In experiment 1, sham-tES was compared to transcranial alternating current stimulation at alpha frequency (10 Hz; α-tACS) (expected to entrain "inhibitory" alpha oscillations) and to cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) (shown to suppress neuronal spiking activity). In experiment 2, we attempted to replicate the findings of experiment 1, and establish frequency-specificity by adding a 45 Hz-tACS condition to α-tACS and sham. In experiment 1, right parietal α-tACS led to the expected changes in spatial attention bias, namely a rightward shift in subjective midpoint estimation (relative to sham). However, this was not confirmed in experiment 2 and in the complete sample. Right parietal c-tDCS and 45 Hz-tACS had no effect. These results highlight the importance of replication studies, adequate statistical power and optimizing tES-interventions for establishing the robustness and reliability of electrical stimulation effects, and best practice.

AB - Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is being investigated as an experimental and clinical interventional technique in human participants. While promising, important limitations have been identified, including weak effect sizes and high inter- and intra-individual variability of outcomes. Here, we compared two "inhibitory" tES-techniques with supposedly different mechanisms of action as to their effects on performance in a visuospatial attention task, and report on a direct replication attempt. In two experiments, 2 × 20 healthy participants underwent tES in three separate sessions testing different protocols (10 min stimulation each) with a montage targeting right parietal cortex (right parietal-left frontal, electrode-sizes: 3cm × 3cm-7 cm × 5 cm), while performing a perceptual line bisection (landmark) task. The tES-protocols were compared as to their ability to modulate pseudoneglect (thought to be under right hemispheric control). In experiment 1, sham-tES was compared to transcranial alternating current stimulation at alpha frequency (10 Hz; α-tACS) (expected to entrain "inhibitory" alpha oscillations) and to cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (c-tDCS) (shown to suppress neuronal spiking activity). In experiment 2, we attempted to replicate the findings of experiment 1, and establish frequency-specificity by adding a 45 Hz-tACS condition to α-tACS and sham. In experiment 1, right parietal α-tACS led to the expected changes in spatial attention bias, namely a rightward shift in subjective midpoint estimation (relative to sham). However, this was not confirmed in experiment 2 and in the complete sample. Right parietal c-tDCS and 45 Hz-tACS had no effect. These results highlight the importance of replication studies, adequate statistical power and optimizing tES-interventions for establishing the robustness and reliability of electrical stimulation effects, and best practice.

KW - Landmark task

KW - Replication

KW - TACS

KW - TDCS

KW - TES reliability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020445493&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00952

DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00952

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85020445493

VL - 8

JO - Frontiers in Psychology

JF - Frontiers in Psychology

SN - 1664-1078

IS - JUN

M1 - 952

ER -