Enhancing Navigation Efficiency via Low Current Brain Stimulation: A Role for Individual Differences

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tad Brunye ◽  
Amanda Holmes ◽  
Julie Cantelon ◽  
Marianna D. Eddy ◽  
Aaron L. Gardony ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Saee Paliwal ◽  
Philip E. Mosley ◽  
Michael Breakspear ◽  
Terry Coyne ◽  
Peter Silburn ◽  
...  

Abstract Subthalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson’s disease (PD) may modulate chronometric and instrumental aspects of choice behaviour, including motor inhibition, decisional slowing, and value sensitivity. However, it is not well known whether subthalamic DBS affects more complex aspects of decision-making, such as the influence of subjective estimates of uncertainty on choices. In this study, 38 participants with PD played a virtual casino prior to subthalamic DBS (whilst ‘on’ medication) and again, 3-months postoperatively (whilst ‘on’ stimulation). At the group level, there was a small but statistically significant decrease in impulsivity postoperatively, as quantified by the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS). The gambling behaviour of participants (bet increases, slot machine switches and double or nothing gambles) was associated with this self-reported measure of impulsivity. However, there was a large variance in outcome amongst participants, and we were interested in whether individual differences in subjective estimates of uncertainty (specifically, volatility) were related to differences in pre- and postoperative impulsivity. To examine these individual differences, we fit a computational model (the Hierarchical Gaussian Filter, HGF), to choices made during slot machine game play as well as a simpler reinforcement learning model based on the Rescorla-Wagner formalism. The HGF was superior in accounting for the behaviour of our participants, suggesting that participants incorporated beliefs about environmental uncertainty when updating their beliefs about gambling outcome and translating these beliefs into action. A specific aspect of subjective uncertainty, the participant’s estimate of the tendency of the slot machine’s winning probability to change (volatility), increased subsequent to DBS. Additionally, the decision temperature of the response model decreased post-operatively, implying greater stochasticity in the belief-to-choice mapping of participants. Model parameter estimates were significantly associated with impulsivity; specifically, increased uncertainty was related to increased postoperative impulsivity. Moreover, changes in these parameter estimates were significantly associated with the maximum post-operative change in impulsivity over a six month follow up period. Our findings suggest that impulsivity in PD patients may be influenced by subjective estimates of uncertainty (environmental volatility) and implicate a role for the subthalamic nucleus in the modulation of outcome certainty. Furthermore, our work outlines a possible approach to characterising those persons who become more impulsive after subthalamic DBS, an intervention in which non-motor outcomes can be highly variable.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saee Paliwal ◽  
Philip E. Mosley ◽  
Michael Breakspear ◽  
Terry Coyne ◽  
Peter Silburn ◽  
...  

1AbstractSubthalamic deep brain stimulation (STN-DBS) for Parkinson’s disease may modulate chronometric and instrumental aspects of choice behaviour, including motor inhibition, decisional slowing, and value sensitivity. However, it is not well known whether STN-DBS affects more complex aspects of decision-making, such as the influence of subjective estimates of uncertainty on choices. In this study, thirty-eight participants with Parkinson’s disease played a virtual casino prior to subthalamic DBS (whilst ‘on’ medication) and again, three-months postoperatively (whilst ‘on’ stimulation). At the group level, there was a small but statistically significant postoperative decrease in impulsivity, as quantified by the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS). The gambling behaviour of participants (bet increases, slot machine switches and double or nothing gambles) was associated with this self-reported measure of impulsivity. However, there was a large variance in outcome amongst participants, and we were interested in whether individual differences in subjective estimates of uncertainty (specifically, volatility) were related to differences in pre- and postoperative impulsivity. To examine these individual differences, we fit a computational model (the Hierarchical Gaussian Filter, HGF), to choices made during slot machine game play as well as a simpler reinforcement learning model based on the Rescorla-Wagner formalism. The HGF was superior in accounting for the behaviour of our participants, suggesting that participants incorporated beliefs about environmental uncertainty when updating their beliefs about gambling outcome and translating these beliefs into action. A specific aspect of subjective uncertainty, the participant’s estimate of the tendency of the slot machine’s winning probability to change (volatility), increased subsequent to DBS. Additionally, the decision temperature of the response model decreased post-operatively, implying greater stochasticity in the belief-to-choice mapping of participants. Model parameter estimates were significantly associated with impulsivity; specifically, increased uncertainty was related to increased postoperative impulsivity. Moreover, changes in these parameter estimates were significantly associated with the maximum post-operative change in impulsivity over a six month follow up period. Our findings suggest that impulsivity in persons with Parkinson’s disease may be influenced by subjective estimates of uncertainty (environmental volatility) and implicate a role for the subthalamic nucleus in the modulation of outcome certainty. Furthermore, our work outlines a possible approach to characterising those persons who become more impulsive after subthalamic DBS, an intervention in which non-motor outcomes can be highly variable.


2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 171-182
Author(s):  
Orsolya Pesthy ◽  
Karolina Janacsek ◽  
Dezső Németh

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising brain stimulation tool which is non-invasive, easy to use and relatively cheap. Since it can change brain activity in a temporal manner, it can contribute to both clinical practice and neuroscientific research. However, the effectiveness of tDCS has been questioned considering the lack of full understanding of its mechanism of action and the seemingly contradictory results. In this review, we aim to provide a summary of potential problems and possible solutions. Our main focus is on the inter-individual differences in the effect of tDCS which can explain the noisy data, thus, controlling for them is important in order to show reliable results. This review is hoped to contribute to maximizing the potential of tDCS by helping future researchers to design replicable studies.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Beth Bell ◽  
Brian Turner ◽  
Lumy Sawaki ◽  
C. Nathan DeWall

Transcranial direct current stimulation can sometimes cause the opposite of its intended effect. These reverse effects may be related in part to individual differences in personality and neurochemistry. Previous studies have demonstrated that dopamine levels can impact the effects of tDCS. In the present study, 124 healthy participants took the UPPS Impulsive Behavior scale. Participants then underwent a single, randomized anodal or sham tDCS session on the prefrontal cortex. While the effects of tDCS were still active, they performed the Stop Signal Task, a measure of state impulsivity. tDCS was associated with increased errors on this task in people who had higher scores on the UPPS in two facets of impulsivity that correlate with dopamine levels. tDCS had no effects on people low in trait impulsivity. These results suggest that the reverse effects of tDCS could be associated with inter-individual differences in personality and neurochemistry.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henryk Bukowski ◽  
Martin Tik ◽  
Giorgia Silani ◽  
Christian Ruff ◽  
Christian Windischberger ◽  
...  

Self-other distinction is crucial for empathy, since it prevents the confusion of self-experienced emotions with those of others. We aimed to extend our understanding of the neurocognitive mechanisms of self-other distinction. Thirty-one female participants underwent continuous theta burst transcranial magnetic stimulation (cTBS) targeting the right supramarginal gyrus (rSMG), a sub-region of the temporoparietal junction previously shown to be involved in self-other distinction, and the vertex, a cortical control site. Right after stimulation they completed a visuo-tactile empathy task in an MRI scanner. Self-other distinction was assessed by differences in emotion judgments, and brain activity between conditions differing in the requirement for self-other distinction. Effects of brain stimulation on self-other distinction depended on individual differences in dispositional empathic understanding: cTBS of rSMG, compared to vertex, enhanced self-other distinction in participants with lower dispositional empathic understanding, but diminished it in participants with higher empathic understanding. On the neural level, this inverse relationship between empathic disposition and self-other distinction performance was linked to a reduction of cTBS-induced rSMG activity in persons with lower dispositional empathy, and an increase in those with lower dispositional empathy. These opposite cTBS impacts were also associated with two anatomically and functionally distinct networks. These findings open up novel perspectives on the causal role of rSMG in self-other distinction and empathy. They also suggest that considering individual differences may yield novel insights into how brain stimulation affects higher-level affect and cognition, and its neural correlates.


Author(s):  
Sarah Beth Bell ◽  
Brian Turner ◽  
Lumy Sawaki ◽  
Nathan DeWall

Abstract Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can sometimes cause the opposite of its intended effect. These reverse effects may be related in part to individual differences in personality and neurochemistry. Previous studies have demonstrated that dopamine levels can impact the effects of tDCS. In the present study, 124 healthy participants took the UPPS impulsive behavior scale. Participants then underwent a single, randomized anodal or sham tDCS session on the prefrontal cortex. While the effects of tDCS were still active, they performed the Stop Signal Task, a measure of state impulsivity. tDCS was associated with increased errors on this task in people who had higher scores on the UPPS in two facets of impulsivity that correlate with dopamine levels. tDCS had no effects on people who are low in trait impulsivity. These results suggest that the reverse effects of tDCS could be associated with inter-individual differences in personality and neurochemistry.


2020 ◽  
Vol 87 (9) ◽  
pp. S45-S46
Author(s):  
Allison Waters ◽  
Kisueng Choi ◽  
Ashan Veerakumar ◽  
Mosadoluwa Obatusin ◽  
Patricio Riva-Posse ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S48-S49
Author(s):  
Stephanie Winkelbeiner ◽  
Whitney Muscat ◽  
Andrea Joanlanne ◽  
Nikolaos Marousis ◽  
Maria Neumeier ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Non-invasive brain stimulation has been introduced as add-on treatment for psychotic symptoms, not least because transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have a low risk profile. Yet, the initial excitement is wearing off and there is a lack of consistent evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT) for the efficacy of brain stimulation. It is often claimed that this is because patients respond very differently to brain stimulation, with some benefiting much more than others. However, is there really strong evidence from RCTs that patients do respond differently? This question can be assessed by comparing the overall variability under active stimulation with the variability under sham stimulation across studies. Methods We included all double-blinded, sham-controlled RCTs and crossover studies of adults with a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder that used TMS or tDCS for the treatment of psychotic symptoms. We extracted a measure of variability (standard deviation, standard error, or confidence interval) of the primary outcome for active and sham stimulation, computed variance-weighted variability ratios for each study, and entered them into a random-effects model. In the case of individual differences in response to TMS or tDCS, we expected that the overall variability under active stimulation would be increased compared to sham stimulation (as evidenced by an overall variability ratio significantly larger than 1). Results A total of 39 RCTs and crossover trials with 1 352 patients were included. We found that the variability under active stimulation was not significantly larger than under sham stimulation (variability ratio = 1.07; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.16; P = 0.098). Discussion These results do not provide strong evidence for the presence of individual differences in response to non-invasive brain stimulation in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The search for subgroups and prognostic biomarkers may require more complex study designs including N-of-1 trials.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Ruisch ◽  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
David A. Pizarro

AbstractWe argue that existing data on folk-economic beliefs (FEBs) present challenges to Boyer & Petersen's model. Specifically, the widespread individual variation in endorsement of FEBs casts doubt on the claim that humans are evolutionarily predisposed towards particular economic beliefs. Additionally, the authors' model cannot account for the systematic covariance between certain FEBs, such as those observed in distinct political ideologies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document