Cited by 167Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Augmentation of working memory training by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

Open access
Ruf, Steffen Philipp, Fallgatter, Andreas J., Plewnia, Christian·2017·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) can modulate working memory (WM) performance. However, evidence regarding the enhancement of WM training, its sustainability and transferability is ambiguous. Since WM functioning appears to be lateralized in respect to stimulus characteristics, this study examined the difference between task-congruent (spatial-right, verbal-left), task-incongruent (spatial-left, verbal-right) and sham tDCS in regards to the efficacy of WM training. In a randomized, sham-controlled experiment, 71 healthy adults trained on a spatial or verbal adaptive n-back task. After a baseline session, anodal or sham tDCS (1 mA) to the right or left dlPFC was applied during the next three training sessions. Sustainability of training gains and near-transfer (verbal or spatial 3-back task) were tested in a fourth training and a follow-up session. Compared to sham stimulation, we found a steeper learning curve when WM training was combined with task-congruent tDCS. This advantage was also present compared to task-incongruent tDCS. Moreover, these effects lasted for up to nine months and transferred to the respective untrained task. These long-lasting, transferable, task-specific effects demonstrate a behaviorally relevant and sustainable facilitation of neuroplastic processes by tDCS that could be harnessed for the treatment of disorders associated with deficient WM.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-017-01055-1

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Combining tDCS with cognitive training has demonstrated additive effects on cognitive and functional abilities in younger and older adults.

    “Combining tDCS with cognitive training has demonstrated additive effects on cognitive and functional abilities in younger [30–32] and older adults [33–36].”

    From Primary outcome from the augmenting cognitive training in older adults study (ACT): A tDCS and cognitive training randomized clinical trial (2023) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Abstract reports that, in 71 healthy adults, task-congruent tDCS improved working-memory training gains and performance on an untrained task compared with sham stimulation. The Methods (Subjects; page not available) give a mean age of 24.45 years, and the Discussion reports prior transfer findings in older adults. The paper does not establish improvement in functional abilities for both age groups; its own measured outcomes were working-memory tasks. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 90 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [73]Hoskinson, P. & Toomim, J. Brain Workshop (Version 4.8.4). (2012).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ruf, S. P., Fallgatter, A. J., & Plewnia, C.
Affiliations
University of Tübingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Plewnia, Christian
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2017-04-21
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
876-876
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2604508934
Cited by
167
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 7
FWCI
9.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (GCBS/FKZ01EE1403D, ESPRIT/FKZ 01EE1407H, FKZ 01EE1407H, 01EE1407H, FKZ 01EE1403D, 01EE1403D)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
transcranial direct current stimulation, working memory training, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, n-back task, transfer of training, neuroplasticity, learning curve, sham stimulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Prefrontal Cortex, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review