4.7 Article

The critical role of phase difference in theta oscillation between bilateral parietal cortices for visuospatial working memory

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-18449-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Taiwan [106-2628-H-008-002-MY4, MOST 103-2410-H-008-023-MY3, MOST 104-2420-H-038-001-MY3, MOST 104-2410-H-038-013-MY3, MOST 106-2410-H-038-005-MY2]
  2. Taipei Medical University (TMU) [104-AE1-B07, 105 TMU-SHH-20]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Visual working memory (VWM) refers to people's ability to maintain and manipulate visual information on line. Its capacity varies between individuals, and neuroimaging studies have suggested a link between one's VWM capacity and theta power in the parietal cortex. However, it is unclear how the parietal cortices communicate with each other in order to support VWM processing. In two experiments we employed transcranial alternate current stimulation (tACS) to use frequency-specific (6 Hz) alternating current to modulate theta oscillation between the left and right parietal cortex with either in-phase (0 degrees difference, Exp 1), anti-phase (180 degrees difference, Exp 2), or sham sinusoidal current stimulation. In Experiment 1, in-phase theta tACS induced an improved VWM performance, but only in low-performers, whereas high-performers suffered a marginally-significant VWM impairment. In Experiment 2, anti-phase theta tACS did not help the low-performers, but significantly impaired high-performers' VWM capacity. These results not only provide causal evidence for theta oscillation in VWM processing, they also highlight the intricate interaction between tACS and individual differences-where the same protocol that enhances low-performers' VWM can backfire for the high-performers. We propose that signal complexity via coherent timing and phase synchronization within the bilateral parietal network is crucial for successful VWM functioning.

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