Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jun 14:16:903977.
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2022.903977. eCollection 2022.

Offline Parietal Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation or Alpha Frequency Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation Has No Effect on Visuospatial or Temporal Attention

Jessica Moretti  1   2 , Welber Marinovic  3 , Alan R Harvey  2   4   5 , Jennifer Rodger  1   2 , Troy A W Visser  6
Affiliations

Offline Parietal Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation or Alpha Frequency Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation Has No Effect on Visuospatial or Temporal Attention

Jessica Moretti et al. Front Neurosci. .

Abstract

Non-invasive brain stimulation is a growing field with potentially wide-ranging clinical and basic science applications due to its ability to transiently and safely change brain excitability. In this study we include two types of stimulation: repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS). Single session stimulations with either technique have previously been reported to induce changes in attention. To better understand and compare the effectiveness of each technique and the basis of their effects on cognition we assessed changes to both temporal and visuospatial attention using an attentional blink task and a line bisection task following offline stimulation with an intermittent theta burst (iTBS) rTMS protocol or 10 Hz tACS. Additionally, we included a novel rTMS stimulation technique, low-intensity (LI-)rTMS, also using an iTBS protocol, which uses stimulation intensities an order of magnitude below conventional rTMS. Animal models show that low-intensity rTMS modulates cortical excitability despite sub-action potential threshold stimulation. Stimulation was delivered in healthy participants over the right posterior parietal cortex (rPPC) using a within-subjects design (n = 24). Analyses showed no evidence for an effect of any stimulation technique on spatial biases in the line bisection task or on magnitude of the attentional blink. Our results suggests that rTMS and LI-rTMS using iTBS protocol and 10 Hz tACS over rPPC do not modulate performance in tasks assessing visuospatial or temporal attention.

Keywords: attention; attentional blink; iTBS; line bisection; rTMS; transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
(A) Overall order and structure of each experimental session. (B) Example of a trial in the line bisection task. (C) Example letter sequence in the attentional blink task (T2 shown at lag 2 position).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Induced e-field modelling of tACS parameters when electrodes are positioned at Cz and P4 and delivering 2 mA peak to peak intensity.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Spatial bias scores for sham and active stimulation for each stimulation type across blocks of the line bisection task. No significant effects or interactions present. Individual points represent mean spatial bias for individual participants. For the bias score: 0 = absolute leftward bias, 1 = absolute rightward bias.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Percentage accuracy for reporting T2| T1 across lag positions for each stimulation type. The attentional blink occurred with Lag 1 sparing. Accuracy did not differ between stimulation parameters for T2| T1. Individual points represent mean accuracy for individual participants.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abellaneda-Pérez K., Martin-Trias P., Cassé-Perrot C., Vaqué-Alcázar L., Lanteaume L., Solana E., et al. (2022). BDNF Val66Met gene polymorphism modulates brain activity following rTMS-induced memory impairment. Sci. Rep. 12:176. 10.1038/s41598-021-04175-x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Antal A., Alekseichuk I., Bikson M., Brockmöller J., Brunoni A. R., Chen R., et al. (2017). Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin. Neurophysiol. 128 1774–1809. 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Arasanz C. P., Staines W. R., Schweizer T. A. (2012). Isolating a cerebellar contribution to rapid visual attention using transcranial magnetic stimulation. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 6:55. 10.3389/fnbeh.2012.00055 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Benwell C. S. Y., Learmonth G., Miniussi C., Harvey M., Thut G. (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. 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.05.007 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benwell C. S. Y., Thut G., Learmonth G., Harvey M. (2013). Spatial attention: differential shifts in pseudoneglect direction with time-on-task and initial bias support the idea of observer subtypes. Neuropsychologia 51 2747–2756. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.09.030 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources