4.7 Article

Shaping Memory Accuracy by Left Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
卷 34, 期 11, 页码 4022-4026

出版社

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5407-13.2014

关键词

brain stimulation; dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; executive functions; false memory; memory encoding; neuroenhancement

资金

  1. Werner Reichardt Centre for Integrative Neuroscience (CIN) at the Eberhard Karls University of Tubingen
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [EXC 307]
  3. University Hospital Tubingen [2086-1-0]
  4. German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) [PL 525/1-1]
  5. CIN [PP 2011_11]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human memory is dynamic and flexible but is also susceptible to distortions arising from adaptive as well as pathological processes. Both accurate and false memory formation require executive control that is critically mediated by the left prefrontal cortex (PFC). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) enables noninvasive modulation of cortical activity and associated behavior. The present study reports that tDCS applied to the left dorsolateral PFC (dlPFC) shaped accuracy of episodic memory via polaritiy-specific modulation of false recognition. When applied during encoding of pictures, anodal tDCS increased whereas cathodal stimulation reduced the number of false alarms to lure pictures in subsequent recognition memory testing. These data suggest that the enhancement of excitability in the dlPFC by anodal tDCS can be associated with blurred detail memory. In contrast, activity-reducing cathodal tDCS apparently acted as a noise filter inhibiting the development of imprecise memory traces and reducing the false memory rate. Consistently, the largest effect was found in the most active condition (i.e., for stimuli cued to be remembered). This first evidence for a polarity-specific, activity-dependent effect of tDCS on false memory opens new vistas for the understanding and potential treatment of disturbed memory control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据