The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Does Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve Healthy Working Memory?: A Meta-analytic Review
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been reported to improve working memory (WM) performance in healthy individuals, suggesting its value as a means of cognitive enhancement. However, recent meta-analyses concluded that tDCS has little or no effect on WM in healthy participants. In this article, we review reasons why these meta-analyses may have underestimated the effect of tDCS on WM and report a more comprehensive and arguably more sensitive meta-analysis. Consistent with our interest in enhancement, we focused on anodal stimulation. Thirty-one articles matched inclusion criteria and were included in four primary meta-analyses assessing the WM effects of anodal stimulation over the left and right dorsolateral pFC (DLPFC) and right parietal lobe as well as left DLPFC stimulation coupled with WM training. These analyses revealed a small but significant effect of left DLPFC stimulation coupled with WM training. Left DLPFC stimulation alone also enhanced WM performance, but the effect was reduced to nonsignificance after correction for publication bias. No other effects were significant, including a variety of tested moderators. Additional meta-analyses were undertaken with study selection criteria based on previous meta-analyses, to reassess the findings from these studies using the analytic methods of this study. These analyses revealed a mix of significant and nonsignificant small effects. We conclude that the primary WM enhancement potential of tDCS probably lies in its use during training.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1989.10488618 · Cited by 99,167
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,395
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
Distribution Theory for Glass's Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators
Hedges, L. V. (1981) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164588 · Cited by 5,695
Nitsche, M. A., & Paulus, W. (2000) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7793.2000.t01-1-00633.x · Cited by 5,656
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · CHANCE · doi:10.1080/09332480.2005.10722754 · Cited by 4,702 · cited 2×
“Flexibility in choice of primary dependent variable can predispose to bias (Ioannidis, 2005), so we adopted a priori criteria for selecting the dependent variables to use in the metaanalysis following Ilieva and colleagues (2015).”
MethodWorking memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach.
Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., & Conway, A. R. A. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.309 · Cited by 3,078
Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008
Nitsche, M. A., Cohen, L. G., Wassermann, E. M., Priori, A., Lang, N., Antal, A., Paulus, W., Hummel, F., Boggio, P. S., Fregni, F., et al. (2008) · Brain Stimulation · doi:10.1016/j.brs.2008.06.004 · Cited by 3,057 · cited 5×
“…anodal stimulation of the left dorsolateral pFC (DLPFC), a finding that makes sense given the tendency for anodal stimulation to enhance neuronal excitability (Nitsche et al., 2008; Priori, 2003; Nitsche & Paulus, 2000) and the role of the left DLPFC in WM (Carpenter, Just, & Reichle, 2000).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Cited by
Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: A consensus and critical position paper
Buch, E. R., Santarnecchi, E., Antal, A., Born, J., Celnik, P. A., Classen, J., Gerloff, C., Hallett, M., Hummel, F. C., Nitsche, M. A., et al. (2017) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2017.01.004 · Cited by 367
Chase, H. W., Boudewyn, M. A., Carter, C. S., & Phillips, M. L. (2020) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-019-0499-9 · Cited by 286
The importance of sample size for reproducibility of tDCS effects
Minarik, T., Berger, B., Althaus, L., Bader, V., Biebl, B., Brotzeller, F., Fusban, T., Hegemann, J., Jesteadt, L., Kalweit, L., et al. (2016) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00453 · Cited by 179
Augmentation of working memory training by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
Ruf, S. P., Fallgatter, A. J., & Plewnia, C. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-01055-1 · Cited by 167
Nilsson, J., Lebedev, A. V., Rydström, A., & Lövdén, M. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617698139 · Cited by 118
Metadata
- Authors
- Mancuso, L. E., Ilieva, I. P., Hamilton, R. H., & Farah, M. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2016-08-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1063-1089
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2333849443
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 71
- FWCI
- 15.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Does Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve Healthy Working Memory?: A Meta-analytic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/jocn_a_00956
- The paper
- Mancuso, L. E., Ilieva, I. P., Hamilton, R. H., & Farah, M. J. (2016). Does Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve Healthy Working Memory?: A Meta-analytic Review. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00956
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
