Interindividual variability in outcomes across individuals poses great challenges for the application of noninvasive brain stimulation in psychological research. Here, we examined how the effects of high-frequency transcranial random-noise stimulation (tRNS) on sustained attention varied as a function of a well-studied electrocortical marker: spontaneous theta:beta ratio. Seventy-two participants received sham, 1-mA, and 2-mA tRNS in a double-blind, crossover manner while they performed a sustained-attention task. Receiving 1-mA tRNS was associated with improved sustained attention, whereas the effect of 2-mA tRNS was similar to the effect of sham tRNS. Furthermore, individuals’ baseline theta:beta ratio moderated the effects of 1-mA tRNS and provided explanatory power beyond baseline behavioral performance. The tRNS-related effects on sustained attention were also accompanied by reductions in theta:beta ratio. These findings impart novel insights into mechanisms underlying tRNS effects and emphasize how designing studies that link variability in cognitive outcomes to variability in neurophysiology can improve inferential power in neurocognitive research.
AikenL. S.WestS. G.RenoR. R. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
2.
AngelidisA.van der DoesW.SchakelL.PutmanP. (2016). Frontal EEG theta/beta ratio as an electrophysiological marker for attentional control and its test-retest reliability. Biological Psychology, 121, 49–52.
3.
ArnsM.ConnersC. K.KraemerH. C. (2013). A decade of EEG theta/beta ratio research in ADHD: A meta-analysis. Journal of Attention Disorders, 17, 374–383.
4.
BatsikadzeG.MoliadzeV.PaulusW.KuoM. F.NitscheM. A. (2013). Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans. The Journal of Physiology, 591, 1987–2000.
5.
BenwellC. S.LearmonthG.MiniussiC.HarveyM.ThutG. (2015). Non-linear effects of transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of individual baseline performance: Evidence from biparietal tDCS influence on lateralized attention bias. Cortex, 69, 152–165.
6.
BremA. K.AlmquistJ. N. F.MansfieldK.PlessowF.SellaF.SantarnecchiE.. . . YeungN. (2018). Modulating fluid intelligence performance through combined cognitive training and brain stimulation. Neuropsychologia, 188(A), 107–114. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.04.008
7.
BridgerR. S.JohnsenS. Å. K.BrasherK. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire. Ergonomics, 56, 1515–1524.
8.
BroadbentD. E.CooperP. F.FitzGeraldP.ParkesK. R. (1982). The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 21, 1–16.
9.
ButtonK. S.IoannidisJ. P.MokryszC.NosekB. A.FlintJ.RobinsonE. S.MunafòM. R. (2013). Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 365–376.
10.
CappellettiM.GessaroliE.HithersayR.MitoloM.DidinoD.KanaiR.. . . WalshV. (2013). Transfer of cognitive training across magnitude dimensions achieved with concurrent brain stimulation of the parietal lobe. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 14899–14907.
11.
DelormeA.MakeigS. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134, 9–21.
12.
DockreeP. M.BarnesJ. J.MatthewsN.DeanA. J.AbeR.NandamL. S.. . . O’ConnellR. G. (2017). The effects of methylphenidate on the neural signatures of sustained attention. Biological Psychiatry, 82, 687–694.
13.
ElmasryJ.LooC.MartinD. (2015). A systematic review of transcranial electrical stimulation combined with cognitive training. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 33, 263–278.
14.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
15.
FertonaniA.MiniussiC. (2017). Transcranial electrical stimulation: What we know and do not know about mechanisms. The Neuroscientist, 23, 109–123.
16.
FortenbaughF. C.DeGutisJ.EstermanM. (2017). Recent theoretical, neural, and clinical advances in sustained attention research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1396, 70–91. doi:10.1111/nyas.13318.
17.
FrankB.HartyS.KlugeA.Cohen KadoshR. (2018). Learning while multitasking: Short and long-term benefits of brain stimulation. Ergonomics, 61, 1454–1463.
18.
GandigaP. C.HummelF. C.CohenL. G. (2006). Transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS): A tool for double-blind sham-controlled clinical studies in brain stimulation. Clinical Neurophysiology, 117, 845–850.
19.
HartyS.SellaF.Cohen KadoshR. (2017). Transcranial electrical stimulation and behavioral change: The intermediary influence of the brain. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, Article 112. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2017.00112
20.
KrauseB.Cohen KadoshR. (2014). Not all brains are created equal: The relevance of individual differences in responsiveness to transcranial electrical stimulation. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 8, Article 25. doi:10.3389/fnsys.2014.00025
21.
LeeI. A.PreacherK. J. (2013). Calculation for the test of the difference between two dependent correlations with one variable in common [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://quantpsy.org
22.
LiL. M.UeharaK.HanakawaT. (2015). The contribution of interindividual factors to variability of response in transcranial direct current stimulation studies. Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, 9, Article 181. doi:10.3389/fncel.2015.00181
23.
LondonR. E.SlagterH. A. (2015). Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation over left dorsolateral pFC on the attentional blink depend on individual baseline performance. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27, 2382–2393. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00867
24.
McDonnellM. D.WardL. M. (2011). The benefits of noise in neural systems: Bridging theory and experiment. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 12, 415–426.
O’ConnellR. G.BellgroveM. A.DockreeP. M.LauA.FitzgeraldM.RobertsonI. H. (2008). Self-alert training: Volitional modulation of autonomic arousal improves sustained attention. Neuropsychologia, 46, 1379–1390.
27.
O’ConnellR. G.DockreeP. M.BellgroveM. A.KellyS. P.HesterR.GaravanH.. . . FoxeJ. J. (2007). The role of cingulate cortex in the detection of errors with and without awareness: A high-density electrical mapping study. European Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 2571–2579.
28.
O’ConnellR. G.DockreeP. M.KellyS. P. (2012). A supramodal accumulation-to-bound signal that determines perceptual decisions in humans. Nature Neuroscience, 15, 1729–1735.
29.
ParkinB. L.BhandariM.GlenJ. C.WalshV. (2019). The physiological effects of transcranial electrical stimulation do not apply to parameters commonly used in studies of cognitive neuromodulation. Neuropsychologia, 128, 332–339.
30.
PosnerM. I.PetersenS. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13, 25–42.
31.
PutmanP.van PeerJ.MaimariI.van der WerffS. (2010). EEG theta/beta ratio in relation to fear-modulated response-inhibition, attentional control, and affective traits. Biological Psychology, 83, 73–78.
32.
R Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
33.
SaadJ. F.KohnM. R.ClarkeS.LagopoulosJ.HermensD. F. (2015). Is the theta/beta EEG marker for ADHD inherently flawed?Journal of Attention Disorders, 22, 815-826.
34.
SarterM.GivensB.BrunoJ. P. (2001). The cognitive neuroscience of sustained attention: Where top-down meets bottom-up. Brain Research Reviews, 35, 146–160.
35.
ShalevN.De WandelL.DockreeP.DemeyereN.ChechlaczM. (2018). Beyond time and space: The effect of a lateralized sustained attention task and brain stimulation on spatial and selective attention. Cortex, 107, 131–147.
36.
Singh-CurryV.HusainM. (2009). The functional role of the inferior parietal lobe in the dorsal and ventral stream dichotomy. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1434–1448.
37.
SnowballA.TachtsidisI.PopescuT.ThompsonJ.DelazerM.ZamarianL.. . . Cohen KadoshR. (2013). Long-term enhancement of brain function and cognition using cognitive training and brain stimulation. Current Biology, 23, 987–992.
38.
SteigerJ. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245
39.
TerneyD.ChaiebL.MoliadzeV.AntalA.PaulusW. (2008). Increasing human brain excitability by transcranial high-frequency random noise stimulation. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 14147–14155.
40.
ThutG.BergmannT. O.FröhlichF.SoekadarS. R.BrittainJ.-S.Valero-CabréA.. . . SiebnerH. R. (2017). Guiding transcranial brain stimulation by EEG/MEG to interact with ongoing brain activity and associated functions: A position paper. Clinical Neurophysiology, 128, 843–857.
41.
UnsworthN.RedickT. S.LakeyC. E.YoungD. L. (2010). Lapses in sustained attention and their relation to executive control and fluid abilities: An individual differences investigation. Intelligence, 38, 111–122.
42.
UnsworthN.SchrockJ. C.EngleR. W. (2004). Working memory capacity and the antisaccade task: Individual differences in voluntary saccade control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1302–1321.
43.
van der GroenO.WenderothN. (2016). Transcranial random noise stimulation of visual cortex: Stochastic resonance enhances central mechanisms of perception. The Journal of Neuroscience, 36, 5289–5298.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
