Anodal tDCS and High-Frequency tRNS Targeting the Occipitotemporal Cortex Do Not Always Enhance Face Perception

There has been increasing interest in the utility of transcranial electrical stimulation as a tool to enhance cognitive abilities. In the domain of face perception, enhancements have been reported for both transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) targeting the occipitotemporal cortex. In a series of two experiments, we attempted to replicate these findings for face identity perception, and extend on previous studies, to determine if similar enhancements are also observed for object and facial expression perception. In Experiment 1, using a single blind, between-subjects design in healthy volunteers (N = 53), we examined whether anodal tDCS over the occipitotemporal cortex enhanced performance on tasks involving perception of face identity, facial expression, and object stimuli, when compared to sham stimulation. We failed to replicate previous findings of enhanced performance on face and object perception, nor extend findings to facial expression perception. In Experiment 2, using a single blind, between-subjects design (N = 39), we examined the effect of high-frequency tRNS over the occipitotemporal cortex using the same three tasks employed in Experiment 1. We failed to replicate previous findings of enhanced face perception following high-frequency tRNS over the occipitotemporal cortex, relative to sham stimulation (although we used different stimulation parameters to that employed in a previous study). We also found no evidence of enhanced facial expression and object perception following high-frequency tRNS. The findings align with a growing body of studies that have failed to replicate previously reported enhancements following administration of tDCS and hint for different efficacy of, on first sight, related stimulation protocols. Future studies should explore the foundation of these differential effects in greater detail.

[1]  M. Lövdén,et al.  Direct-Current Stimulation Does Little to Improve the Outcome of Working Memory Training in Older Adults , 2017, Psychological science.

[2]  C. Miniussi,et al.  On the Functional Equivalence of Electrodes in Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation , 2016, Brain Stimulation.

[3]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP , 2017, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[4]  Kathleen Veizel,et al.  Wechsler Memory Scale–Fourth Edition , 2014 .

[5]  B. Duchaine,et al.  High-Frequency Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation Enhances Perception of Facial Identity , 2015, Cerebral cortex.

[6]  M. Nitsche,et al.  Anodal-tDCS over the human right occipital cortex enhances the perception and memory of both faces and objects , 2016, Neuropsychologia.

[7]  Linda Jeffery,et al.  How distinct is the coding of face identity and expression? Evidence for some common dimensions in face space , 2015, Cognition.

[8]  A. Brunoni,et al.  The effect of the interval-between-sessions on prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on cognitive outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2016, Journal of Neural Transmission.

[9]  M. Nitsche,et al.  Effects of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation on Cognition , 2012, Clinical EEG and neuroscience.

[10]  A. Antal,et al.  Increasing Human Brain Excitability by Transcranial High-Frequency Random Noise Stimulation , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  David I. Perrett,et al.  Facial expressions of emotion: Stimuli and tests (FEEST) , 2002 .

[12]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications , 2017, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[13]  A. Young,et al.  Understanding the recognition of facial identity and facial expression , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[14]  Roi Cohen Kadosh,et al.  Not all brains are created equal: the relevance of individual differences in responsiveness to transcranial electrical stimulation , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[15]  K. Nakayama,et al.  The Cambridge Face Memory Test: Results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[16]  Paul B. Fitzgerald,et al.  Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Findings From Healthy and Neuropsychiatric Populations , 2016, Brain Stimulation.

[17]  M. Nitsche,et al.  Preliminary Evidence of “Other-Race Effect”-Like Behavior Induced by Cathodal-tDCS over the Right Occipital Cortex, in the Absence of Overall Effects on Face/Object Processing , 2017, Front. Neurosci..

[18]  B. Gordon,et al.  Reproducibility of tDCS Results in a Randomized Trial: Failure to Replicate Findings of tDCS-Induced Enhancement of Verbal Fluency , 2016, Cognitive and behavioral neurology : official journal of the Society for Behavioral and Cognitive Neurology.

[19]  G. Yovel,et al.  Diagnosing prosopagnosia: Effects of ageing, sex, and participant–stimulus ethnic match on the Cambridge Face Memory Test and Cambridge Face Perception Test , 2009, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[20]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Covert face recognition in congenital prosopagnosia: A group study , 2012, Cortex.

[21]  A. Vercammen,et al.  Anodal tDCS targeting the right orbitofrontal cortex enhances facial expression recognition. , 2015, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[22]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Congenital prosopagnosia: face-blind from birth , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[23]  Ludovica Labruna,et al.  Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Does Not Influence the Speed–Accuracy Tradeoff in Perceptual Decision-making: Evidence from Three Independent Studies , 2016, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[24]  Sherryse L. Corrow,et al.  Prosopagnosia: current perspectives , 2016, Eye and brain.

[25]  M. Falkmer,et al.  Face Recognition and Visual Search Strategies in Autism Spectrum Disorders: Amending and Extending a Recent Review by Weigelt et al. , 2015, PloS one.

[26]  Tad T. Brunyé,et al.  Non-invasive brain stimulation targeting the right fusiform gyrus selectively increases working memory for faces , 2017, Brain and Cognition.

[27]  C. Miniussi,et al.  Transcranial Electrical Stimulation , 2016, The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry.

[28]  M. Koslowsky,et al.  tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: a meta-analytical review , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[29]  Jared Medina,et al.  No evidential value in samples of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) studies of cognition and working memory in healthy populations , 2017, Cortex.

[30]  Michael Schneider,et al.  Electrical brain stimulation (tES) improves learning more than performance: A meta-analysis , 2018, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[31]  L. Schmalzl,et al.  What is Overt and what is Covert in Congenital Prosopagnosia? , 2013, Neuropsychology Review.

[32]  Jessica L. Irons,et al.  New Tests to Measure Individual Differences in Matching and Labelling Facial Expressions of Emotion, and Their Association with Ability to Recognise Vocal Emotions and Facial Identity , 2013, PloS one.

[33]  Richard N. A. Henson,et al.  Perception and Conception: Temporal Lobe Activity during Complex Discriminations of Familiar and Novel Faces and Objects , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[34]  Andrew W. Young,et al.  Quaglino's 1867 Case of Prosopagnosia , 2003, Cortex.

[35]  Ken Nakayama,et al.  Psychosocial consequences of developmental prosopagnosia: a problem of recognition. , 2008, Journal of psychosomatic research.

[36]  Michael F. Green,et al.  Social cognition in schizophrenia , 2015, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[37]  Jordan Grafman,et al.  Bilateral frontal transcranial direct current stimulation: Failure to replicate classic findings in healthy subjects , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[38]  Elinor McKone,et al.  Impaired holistic coding of facial expression and facial identity in congenital prosopagnosia , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[39]  J. Barton Structure and function in acquired prosopagnosia: lessons from a series of 10 patients with brain damage. , 2008, Journal of neuropsychology.

[40]  M. Nitsche,et al.  Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation , 2000, The Journal of physiology.

[41]  Lucia M. Li,et al.  The contribution of interindividual factors to variability of response in transcranial direct current stimulation studies , 2015, Front. Cell. Neurosci..

[42]  L. Cohen,et al.  Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008 , 2008, Brain Stimulation.