Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages (June 2013)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 20, Issue 22, Pages (November 2010)
Advertisements

Elizabeth V. Goldfarb, Marvin M. Chun, Elizabeth A. Phelps  Neuron 
Single-Neuron Correlates of Atypical Face Processing in Autism
A Source for Feature-Based Attention in the Prefrontal Cortex
Araceli Ramirez-Cardenas, Maria Moskaleva, Andreas Nieder 
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages e4 (December 2017)
Perceptual Echoes at 10 Hz in the Human Brain
Ji Dai, Daniel I. Brooks, David L. Sheinberg  Current Biology 
Walking Modulates Speed Sensitivity in Drosophila Motion Vision
Frontal Cortex and the Discovery of Abstract Action Rules
Huan Luo, Xing Tian, Kun Song, Ke Zhou, David Poeppel  Current Biology 
Matthias J. Gruber, Bernard D. Gelman, Charan Ranganath  Neuron 
Volume 17, Issue 21, Pages (November 2007)
Volume 27, Issue 20, Pages e3 (October 2017)
Perirhinal-Hippocampal Connectivity during Reactivation Is a Marker for Object-Based Memory Consolidation  Kaia L. Vilberg, Lila Davachi  Neuron  Volume.
Scale-Invariant Movement Encoding in the Human Motor System
Attention Modulates Spinal Cord Responses to Pain
Volume 62, Issue 5, Pages (June 2009)
Jason Samaha, Bradley R. Postle  Current Biology 
Differential Impact of Behavioral Relevance on Quantity Coding in Primate Frontal and Parietal Neurons  Pooja Viswanathan, Andreas Nieder  Current Biology 
Roman F. Loonis, Scott L. Brincat, Evan G. Antzoulatos, Earl K. Miller 
Feature- and Order-Based Timing Representations in the Frontal Cortex
Lior Cohen, Gideon Rothschild, Adi Mizrahi  Neuron 
Volume 82, Issue 5, Pages (June 2014)
Selective Entrainment of Theta Oscillations in the Dorsal Stream Causally Enhances Auditory Working Memory Performance  Philippe Albouy, Aurélien Weiss,
Tobias Staudigl, Simon Hanslmayr  Current Biology 
Cristina Márquez, Scott M. Rennie, Diana F. Costa, Marta A. Moita 
Damian M. Herz, Baltazar A. Zavala, Rafal Bogacz, Peter Brown 
Benedikt Zoefel, Alan Archer-Boyd, Matthew H. Davis  Current Biology 
Masako Tamaki, Ji Won Bang, Takeo Watanabe, Yuka Sasaki 
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages e4 (December 2017)
Modality-Independent Coding of Spatial Layout in the Human Brain
Human Orbitofrontal Cortex Represents a Cognitive Map of State Space
Volume 53, Issue 2, Pages (January 2007)
Single-Unit Responses Selective for Whole Faces in the Human Amygdala
Mathilde Bonnefond, Ole Jensen  Current Biology 
Acetylcholine Mediates Behavioral and Neural Post-Error Control
Volume 22, Issue 18, Pages (September 2012)
The Occipital Place Area Is Causally Involved in Representing Environmental Boundaries during Navigation  Joshua B. Julian, Jack Ryan, Roy H. Hamilton,
Walking Modulates Speed Sensitivity in Drosophila Motion Vision
BOLD fMRI Correlation Reflects Frequency-Specific Neuronal Correlation
Einat S. Peled, Zachary L. Newman, Ehud Y. Isacoff  Current Biology 
Volume 25, Issue 3, Pages (February 2015)
Perception Matches Selectivity in the Human Anterior Color Center
Volume 25, Issue 5, Pages (March 2015)
Bettina Sorger, Joel Reithler, Brigitte Dahmen, Rainer Goebel 
Nonsomatotopic Organization of the Higher Motor Centers in Octopus
Caudate Microstimulation Increases Value of Specific Choices
Dissociable Effects of Salience on Attention and Goal-Directed Action
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages (February 2017)
Gilad A. Jacobson, Peter Rupprecht, Rainer W. Friedrich 
Attention Reorients Periodically
Facial-Expression and Gaze-Selective Responses in the Monkey Amygdala
Event Boundaries Trigger Rapid Memory Reinstatement of the Prior Events to Promote Their Representation in Long-Term Memory  Ignasi Sols, Sarah DuBrow,
How Dopamine Enhances an Optimism Bias in Humans
Function and Structure of Human Left Fusiform Cortex Are Closely Associated with Perceptual Learning of Faces  Taiyong Bi, Juan Chen, Tiangang Zhou, Yong.
Training Attentional Control in Infancy
Traces of Experience in the Lateral Entorhinal Cortex
Role of the Cerebellum in Adaptation to Delayed Action Effects
Claudia Lunghi, Uzay E. Emir, Maria Concetta Morrone, Holly Bridge 
Michael L. Mack, Alison R. Preston, Bradley C. Love  Current Biology 
Christa Müller-Axt, Alfred Anwander, Katharina von Kriegstein 
Volume 21, Issue 7, Pages (April 2011)
Christoph Kayser, Nikos K. Logothetis, Stefano Panzeri  Current Biology 
Attention-Dependent Representation of a Size Illusion in Human V1
Matthew R. Roesch, Adam R. Taylor, Geoffrey Schoenbaum  Neuron 
Spatiotemporal Neural Pattern Similarity Supports Episodic Memory
New Insights in Human Memory Interference and Consolidation
Responsibility Assignment in Redundant Systems
Prefrontal Control of Visual Distraction
Presentation transcript:

Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages 987-992 (June 2013) Long-Term Enhancement of Brain Function and Cognition Using Cognitive Training and Brain Stimulation  Albert Snowball, Ilias Tachtsidis, Tudor Popescu, Jacqueline Thompson, Margarete Delazer, Laura Zamarian, Tingting Zhu, Roi Cohen Kadosh  Current Biology  Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages 987-992 (June 2013) DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.045 Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Schematic Representation of the Arithmetic Learning Regimes (A) The calculation task. Answers to each calculation problem were obtained by manipulation of two numerical operands according to a particular algorithm (either [(right number – left number) + 1] + right number or [(right number + left number) − 10] + right number). Participants were instructed to enter their two-digit solution on the number pad of a standard QWERTY keyboard. Positive and negative feedback was provided for each answer (500 ms duration), and participants were only allowed to progress to subsequent problems once they had obtained the correct solution. (B) The drill task. Each trial began with the presentation of two numerical operands accompanied by the problem’s answer. After the initial presentation, the problem would disappear from the screen and reappear without the answer, at which point subjects were required to enter their two-digit solution. Positive and negative feedback was provided (500 ms duration), and if participants answered incorrectly, the whole presentation cycle would repeat. Calculation and drill problems were presented in alternating groups of 18, referred to as “blocks.” In line with previous studies [7], the total number of blocks varied according to the day of training: ten blocks on the first day, 12 on the second, 14 on the third, 16 on the fourth, and 14 on the fifth. The ratio of calculation to drill blocks was the same on each day, at 1:1. For both tasks, the round-edged boxes represent the individual presentation screens, and the square-edged boxes the time delays between each presentation screen. Current Biology 2013 23, 987-992DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.045) Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 The Effect of TRNS on Arithmetic Performance (A) Calculation learning rates during training were significantly higher in the TRNS group relative to sham controls. (B) Drill learning rates during training were significantly higher in the TRNS group relative to sham controls. (C) Calculation RTs during testing were significantly faster in the TRNS group relative to sham controls for both old and new problems. (D) Drill RTs during testing did not differ between TRNS and sham groups for either old or new problems. Error bars indicate one SEM. Significant differences are marked with asterisks. See also Figure S2. Current Biology 2013 23, 987-992DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.045) Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 NIRS: The Effect of TRNS on Hemodynamic Response Amplitudes and Latencies within the Left LPFC during Training (A) Combined TRNS-NIRS setup. The NIRS plate (orange) is embedded with two transmitting and six receiving optodes and secured to the forehead: transmitting optodes are capped with blue labels, and receiving optodes are unmarked. Recordings were taken during the training phase on the first day and the fifth (last) day, as well as during the testing phase 6 months later. The fiber optic cables connecting the optodes to the NIRS device can be seen emanating from the top of the image. TRNS electrodes are positioned over the bilateral DLPFC and encased in blue and red saline-soaked sponges, as shown. This innovative TES-NIRS combination allowed us to quantify the hemodynamic response to functional activation and to assess how it varied as a function of brain stimulation and arithmetic training. (B) TRNS reduced the amplitude of HbO2 and HbT responses by the end of training. A significant three-way interaction between hemodynamic measure, day, and group in the left LPFC indicates a significant decrease in peak amplitude for HbO2 and HbT at the end of the training (fifth day) in the TRNS group relative to sham controls. (C) Reduced peak latencies emerged in the TRNS group compared to sham controls, for HbO2, HHb, and HbT responses, independent of day. Both these effects were restricted to the left LPFC. Error bars indicate one SEM. Significant differences are marked with asterisks. See also Figure S3. Current Biology 2013 23, 987-992DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.045) Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 The Effect of TRNS on Hemodynamic Response Latencies during Testing: Relationship with Behavioral Performance (A) A significant two-way interaction existed between learning regime and group for peak latency in the left LPFC, 6 months after the end of training. While the TRNS and sham groups did not differ for drill problems, the TRNS group showed a significant decrease in peak latency compared to sham controls for calculation problems. Error bars indicate one SEM. Significant differences are marked with asterisks. (B) Significant correlations existed between calculation RTs and the peak time of changes in HbO2, HHb, and HbT concentrations 6 months after the completion of training. See also Figure S4. Current Biology 2013 23, 987-992DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.045) Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions