Trial reportPloS one2015
Language and Memory Improvements following tDCS of Left Lateral Prefrontal Cortex.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying regions in prefrontal cortex related to working memory improvement: A novel meta-analytic method using electric field modeling.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Cloze, Frequency, Surprisal, or Plausibility? A Comparative Analysis of Predictors for Local Ambiguity Resolution.Cognitive science · 2026Article
- Personalized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Behavioral and Neurophysiologic Outcomes.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Language and cognitive function in children: a narrative review of neural, behavioral, and developmental evidence.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Personalized Dose Selection for Treatment of Patients with Neuropsychiatric Disorders Using tDCS.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Meta-modeling the effects of anodal left prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory performance.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Role of cognitive control in resolving two types of conflict during spoken word production.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2023Article
- Inter-Individual Variability in tDCS Effects: A Narrative Review on the Contribution of Stable, Variable, and Contextual Factors.Brain sciences · 2022Review
- Modulating Cognitive-Motor Multitasking with Commercial-off-the-Shelf Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Blinding in tDCS Studies: Correct End-of-Study Guess Does Not Moderate the Effects on Associative and Working Memory.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Direct impact of cognitive control on sentence processing and comprehension.Language, cognition and neuroscience · 2021Article
- Moving From Bilingual Traits to States: Understanding Cognition and Language Processing Through Moment-to-Moment Variation.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2021Review
- Combined and Isolated Effects of Acute Exercise and Brain Stimulation on Executive Function in Healthy Young Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Cognitive Control Facilitates Attentional Disengagement during Second Language Comprehension.Brain sciences · 2019Article
- Modulating Applied Task PerformanceFrontiers in human neuroscience · 2019Review
- Dorsolateral Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Modulates Language Processing but Does Not Facilitate Overt Second Language Word Production.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- Null Effects on Working Memory and Verbal Fluency Tasks When Applying Anodal tDCS to the Inferior Frontal Gyrus of Healthy Participants.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- A common neural hub resolves syntactic and non-syntactic conflict through cooperation with task-specific networks.Brain and language · 2017Article
- Sex and Electrode Configuration in Transcranial Electrical Stimulation.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2017Article
- Single neuron recordings of bilinguals performing in a continuous recognition memory task.PloS one · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent research demonstrates that performance on executive-control measures can be enhanced through brain stimulation of lateral prefrontal regions. Separate psycholinguistic work emphasizes the importance of left lateral prefrontal cortex executive-control resources during sentence processing, especially when readers must override early, incorrect interpretations when faced with temporary ambiguity. Using transcranial direct current stimulation, we tested whether stimulation of left lateral prefrontal cortex had discriminate effects on language and memory conditions that rely on executive-control (versus cases with minimal executive-control demands, even in the face of task difficulty). Participants were randomly assigned to receive Anodal, Cathodal, or Sham stimulation of left lateral prefrontal cortex while they (1) processed ambiguous and unambiguous sentences in a word-by-word self-paced reading task and (2) performed an n-back memory task that, on some trials, contained interference lure items reputed to require executive-control. Across both tasks, we parametrically manipulated executive-control demands and task difficulty. Our results revealed that the Anodal group outperformed the remaining groups on (1) the sentence processing conditions requiring executive-control, and (2) only the most complex n-back conditions, regardless of executive-control demands. Together, these findings add to the mounting evidence for the selective causal role of left lateral prefrontal cortex for executive-control tasks in the language domain. Moreover, we provide the first evidence suggesting that brain stimulation is a promising method to mitigate processing demands encountered during online sentence processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.