Lateralization of Brain Function in Task Switching: Evidence Based on tDCS and TMS Technology

Wang Xuan; Zhu Rongjuan; You Xuqun

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240406

PDF(353 KB)

Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2024, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (4) : 812-818. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240406

General Psychology, Experimental Psychology & Ergonomics

Lateralization of Brain Function in Task Switching: Evidence Based on tDCS and TMS Technology

Wang Xuan^1,2, Zhu Rongjuan^1,2, You Xuqun^1,2

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Task switching is one component of executive function. It refers to the process of switching from one cognitive task to another, emphasizing the ability to flexibly switch between tasks, goals or psychological settings. Because task switching is the most basic daily cognitive activity of human beings, it is of great importance to study its neural mechanisms. In the research on the neural mechanism of task switching, researchers have made some research achievements in the two research fields by using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to explore the lateralization effects of the two hemispheres of the brain.
Firstly, researchers concluded that the frontal lobe is the core brain area of task switching, in which the left hemisphere plays an important role. The main method is to change the tDCS montage. For example, to separate the contribution of left and right DLPFC, researchers put anode in the left DLPFC and cathode in the right OFC for a group, and in the other group, cathode was put in the left DLPFC and anode was put in the right OFC. All participants received tDCS for 15 minutes at 1 mA intensity and the results showed that the left DLPFC receiving anode stimulation could improve the ability of task switching. However, not all experiments obtained similar results. For example, some studies used the elderly as the participants and took the cue paradigm as the switching task. All participants received tDCS for 30 minutes at 1 mA intensity each day with 10 consecutive days. However, it was found that the individual switching cost did not decrease and the performance of task switching did not improve. Therefore, it could not be proved that the left hemisphere of DLPFC is the dominant hemisphere of task switching. It was speculated that the reason for the controversy in these studies may be that tDCS is only an auxiliary tool for cognitive training rather than an independent cognitive regulation tool. As a result, in some studies, the advantages of left DLPFC in task switching cannot be highlighted. In addition, even if the anode tDCS on left DLPFC may improve the performance of task switching independently of training. However, some variables weaken the effect of tDCS, such as aging factors.
Secondly, the left and right hemispheres of the frontal region cooperate to form neural loop movement to support task switching. By changing the tDCS montage, researchers found that the endogenous preparation in the process of task switching needs the main force of the right DLPFC to participate in and inhibit the inappropriate task setting. Meanwhile, the exogenous regulation relies on the left DLPFC to perform a top-down adaptation process. In addition, different task types will affect the neural circuit movement in the right and left hemispheres.
Future studies should be improved in five aspects. First of all, it is of significant to improve the application level of tDCS technology. For example, researchers should pay attention to the effectiveness of tDCS stimulation, experimental ethics and individual differences. Moreover, in addition to the frontal lobe, it is necessary to study other brain regions, such as the parietal lobe. Moreover, other neural regulation technologies such as Transcranial Magnetic Simulation (TMS for short) and biofeedback could be used in future studies, and future studies with functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) combined with online tDCS should be performed to test the asymmetric involvement of right and left hemispheres in task switching. Besides, researchers should explore the mystery of brain function lateralization in task switching from the perspectives of physiological anatomy, molecular genetics, psychiatry, and other disciplines. Last but not least, future studies should take deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning as the guiding ideology.

Key words

task switching / lateralization of brain function / tDCS / TMS

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Wang Xuan, Zhu Rongjuan, You Xuqun. Lateralization of Brain Function in Task Switching: Evidence Based on tDCS and TMS Technology[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2024, 47(4): 812-818 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240406

References

[1] 刘远文, 方杰, 姜荣荣, 胡楠, 潘翠环, 叶正茂, 罗丽娟. (2017). 高频重复经颅磁刺激对脑卒中患者执行功能的影响. 中华神经科杂志, 50(10), 745-750.
[2] 周婷, 巩尊科, 王世雁, 王密, 汪艳. (2017). 重复经颅磁刺激对脑卒中后执行功能障碍的影响. 实用医学杂志, 33(7), 1036-1039.
[3] 邹淑怡, 唐志明, 李鑫, 安德连, 曾妍, 曾佩珊, 温红梅. (2019). rTMS治疗基底节区脑出血后遗症期患者执行功能障碍1例报告. 中国实用神经疾病杂志, 22(8), 905-909.
[4] Amodeo L. R., McMurray M. S., & Roitman J. D. (2017). Orbitofrontal cortex reflects changes in response-outcome contingencies during probabilistic reversal learning. Neuroscience, 345, 27-37.
[5] Aquili L., Liu A. W., Shindou M., Shindou T., & Wickens J. R. (2014). Behavioral flexibility is increased by optogenetic inhibition of neurons in the nucleus accumbens shell during specific time segments. Learning and Memory, 21(4), 223-231.
[6] Asgharian Asl, F., & Vaghef, L. (2022). The effectiveness of high-frequency left DLPFC-rTMS on depression, response inhibition, and cognitive flexibility in female subjects with major depressive disorder. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 149, 287-292.
[7] Botvinick, M., & Braver, T. (2015). Motivation and cognitive control: From behavior to neural mechanism. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 83-113.
[8] Bressler, S. L., & Menon, V. (2010). Large-scale brain networks in cognition: Emerging methods and principles. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(6), 277-290.
[9] Cole M. W., Reynolds J. R., Power J. D., Repovs G., Anticevic A., & Braver T. S. (2013). Multi-task connectivity reveals flexible hubs for adaptive task control. Nature Neuroscience, 16(9), 1348-1355.
[10] Cools R., Clark L., Owen A. M., & Robbins T. W. (2002). Defining the neural mechanisms of probabilistic reversal learning using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Neuroscience, 22(11), 4563-4567.
[11] Cui, H., & Andersen, R. A. (2011). Different representations of potential and selected motor plans by distinct parietal areas. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(49), 18130-18136.
[12] Dosenbach N. U. F., Fair D. A., Miezin F. M., Cohen A. L., Wenger K. K., Dosenbach R. A. T., & Petersen S. E. (2007). Distinct brain networks for adaptive and stable task control in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(26), 11073-11078.
[13] Dosenbach N. U. F., Visscher K. M., Palmer E. D., Miezin F. M., Wenger K. K., Kang H. C., & Petersen S. E. (2006). A core system for the implementation of task sets. Neuron, 50(5), 799-812.
[14] Dreher, J. C., & Grafman, J. (2003). Dissociating the roles of the rostral anterior cingulate and the lateral prefrontal cortices in performing two tasks simultaneously or successively. Cerebral Cortex, 13(4), 329-339.
[15] Fregni F., Boggio P. S., Nitsche M., Bermpohl F., Antal A., Feredoes E., & Pascual-Leone A. (2005). Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of prefrontal cortex enhances working memory. Experimental Brain Research, 166(1), 23-30.
[16] Gazzaniga, M. S. (2000). Cerebral specialization and interhemispheric communication: Does the corpus callosum enable the human condition? Brain, 123, 1293-1326.
[17] Giggins O. M., Persson U. M., & Caulfield B. (2013). Biofeedback in rehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 10, Article 60.
[18] Hippmann B., Kuhlemann I., Bäumer T., Bahlmann J., Münte T. F., & Jessen S. (2019). Boosting the effect of reward on cognitive control using TMS over the left IF[J]. Neuropsychologia, 125, 109-115.
[19] Hoshi, E. (2006). Functional specialization within the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: A review of anatomical and physiological studies of non-human primates. Neuroscience Research, 54(2), 73-84.
[20] Ilieva I. P., Alexopoulos G. S., Dubin M. J., Morimoto S. S., Victoria L. W., & Gunning F. M. (2018). Age-related repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation effects on executive function in depression: A systematic review. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 26(3), 334-346.
[21] Izquierdo A., Brigman J. L., Radke A. K., Rudebeck P. H., & Holmes A. (2017). The neural basis of reversal learning: An updated perspective. Neuroscience, 345, 12-26.
[22] Karim A. A., Schneider M., Lotze M., Veit R., Sauseng P., Braun C., & Birbaumer N. (2010). The truth about lying: Inhibition of the anterior prefrontal cortex improves deceptive behavior. Cerebral Cortex, 20(1), 205-213.
[23] Kaster T. S., Chen L., Daskalakis Z. J., Hoy K. E., Blumberger D. M., & Fitzgerald P. B. (2020). Depressive symptom trajectories associated with standard and accelerated rTMS. Brain Stimulation, 13(3), 850-857.
[24] Kaur M., Naismith S. L., Lagopoulos J., Hermens D. F., Lee R. S. C., Carpenter J. S., & Hickie I. B. (2019). Sleep-wake, cognitive and clinical correlates of treatment outcome with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for young adults with depression. Psychiatry Research, 271, 335-342.
[25] Leite J., Carvalho S., Fregni F., Boggio P. S., & Gonçalves Ó. F. (2013). The effects of cross-hemispheric dorsolateral prefrontal cortex transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on task switching. Brain Stimulation, 6(4), 660-667.
[26] Li B. K., Liu H. H., Pérez A., & Xie N. (2018). Cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation over right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex improves language control during language switching. Behavioural Brain Research, 351, 34-41.
[27] Long H., Wang H. B., Zhao C. G., Duan Q., Feng F., Hui N., & Yuan H. (2018). Effects of combining high- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb hemiparesis in the early phase of stroke. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 36(1), 21-30.
[28] Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167-202.
[29] Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8-14.
[30] Moos K., Vossel S., Weidner R., Sparing R., & Fink G. R. (2012). Modulation of top-down control of visual attention by cathodal tDCS over right IPS. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(46), 16360-16368.
[31] Muhle-Karbe P. S., Andres M., & Brass M. (2014). Transcranial magnetic stimulation dissociates prefrontal and parietal contributions to task preparation. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(37), 12481-12489.
[32] Nejati V., Salehinejad M. A., Nitsche M. A., Najian A., & Javadi A. H. (2020). Transcranial direct current stimulation improves executive dysfunctions in ADHD: Implications for inhibitory control, interference control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility. Journal of Attention Disorders, 24(13), 1928-1943.
[33] Nitsche, M. A., & Paulus, W. (2000). Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. Journal of Physiology, 527(3), 633-639.
[34] Ouellet J., McGirr A., van den Eynde F., Jollant F., Lepage M., & Berlim M. T. (2015). Enhancing decision-making and cognitive impulse control with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied over the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC): A randomized and sham-controlled exploratory study. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 69, 27-34.
[35] Ozcan S., Gica S., & Gulec H. (2020). Suicidal behavior in treatment resistant major depressive disorder patients treated with transmagnetic stimulation(TMS) and its relationship with cognitive functions. Psychiatry Research, 286, Article 112873.
[36] Palaus M., Viejo-Sobera R., Redolar-Ripoll D., & Marrón E. M. (2020). Cognitive enhancement via neuromodulation and video games: Synergistic effects? Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 14, Article 235.
[37] Parris B. A., Wadsley M. G., Hasshim N., Benattayallah A., Augustinova M., & Ferrand L. (2019). An fMRI study of response and semantic conflict in the stroop task. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2426.
[38] Soyata A. Z., Aksu S., Woods A. J., İşçen P., Saçar K. T., & Karamürsel S. (2019). Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on decision making and cognitive flexibility in gambling disorder. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 269(3), 275-284.
[39] Stelzel C., Basten U., & Fiebach C. J. (2011). Functional connectivity separates switching operations in the posterior lateral frontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(11), 3529-3539.
[40] Tayeb, Y., & Lavidor, M. (2016). Enhancing switching abilities: Improving practice effect by stimulating the dorsolateral pre frontal cortex. Neuroscience, 313, 92-98.
[41] Tseng P., Hsu T. Y., Chang C. F., Tzeng O. J. L., Hung D. L., Muggleton N. G., & Juan C. H. (2012). Unleashing potential: Transcranial direct current stimulation over the right posterior parietal cortex improves change detection in low-performing individuals. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(31), 10554-10561.
[42] Vallortigara, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of left and right: Costs and benefits of lateralization. Developmental Psychobiology, 48(6), 418-427.
[43] Ware A., Lum J. A. G., & Kirkovski M. (2021). Continuous theta-burst stimulation modulates language-related inhibitory processes in bilinguals: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Structure and Function, 226(5), 1453-1466.