经颅直流电刺激探索DLPFC与ACC在冲突适应效应中功能的分离
详细信息 查看官网全文
- 英文论文题名：Functional dissociation of DLPFC and ACC in conflict adaptation effect with electrical stimulation
- 论文作者：荆芳 ; 汪莹 ; 张效初
- 英文论文作者：Jing Fang ; Wang Ying ; School of Life Science ; University of Science and Technology of China
- 年：2015
- 作者机构：中国科学技术大学生命科学学院;
- 论文关键词：冲突适应效应 ; 经颅直流电刺激 ; 背外侧前额叶 ; 前扣带回 ; flanker任务
- 英文论文关键词：CAE ; tDCS ; DLPFC ; ACC ; flanker task
- 会议召开时间：2015-10-16
- 会议录名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议摘要集——心理学与社会发展
- 英文会议录名称：Proceedings of the 18th National Academic Congress of Psychology
- 语种：中文
- 分类号：B842.1
- 学会代码：ZGXG
- 会议名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议
- 会议地点：中国天津
- 主办单位：中国心理学会
- 学会名称：中国心理学会
- 页数：3
- 文件大小：757k
- 原文格式：D
- 会议级别：全国
摘要
背景:大脑在执行认知冲突任务时,可以根据先前的经历来调节当前的认知控制水平,这表现为冲突适应效应(conflict adaptation effect,CAE)。作为解释CAE最有影响的理论,冲突监测理论将认知控制分为两个加工阶段,并分别将冲突监测与扣带前回(anterior cingulate cortex,ACC)、冲突控制与背外侧前额叶(dorsolateral prefrontal cortex,DLPFC)相联系。但是到目前为止还没有直接的因果性证据的相关报道。方法:本研究用经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)手段,使用经典的flanker任务范式进行试验。试验采取被试内设计,三种处理条件为:抑制左侧DLPFC、抑制ACC和伪刺激。在前两种条件中,试验任务全程均伴随2mA的直流电刺激,各约20min。三种试验条件的次序在受试者间经过平衡,同一受试者不同条件间隔时间均大于96小时。有26名健康受试者完成全部任务且三种条件下正确率均大于90%。统计各试次类型的反应时,其中根据前人文献CAE=(RT_(cI)–RT_(cC))-(RT_(iI)–RT_(iC));在不同处理条件间通过配对样本T检验进行统计分析。结果:(1)在伪刺激条件下,冲突适应效应明显,即CAE>0(t=3.059,P=0.005),与前人结果一致。(2)在抑制左侧DLPFC条件下和在抑制ACC条件下,RTC和RTI均有大于伪刺激条件的趋势(尽管统计结果不显著)。(3)在抑制左侧DLPFC条件下,CAE显著大于伪刺激条件(t=3.724,P=0.001);在抑制ACC条件下,CAE值与伪刺激条件无显著差异(t=-0.385,P=0.703)。讨论:我们结果提示DLPFC与ACC在冲突适应效应中的功能分离。本研究为冲突适应效应自上而下的解释提供了直接证据,对认知控制神经机制的探索有一定理论意义。
Background: When performing tasks about cognitive conflict, the brains can adjust current level of cognitive control according to previous experience, which is demonstrated as conflict adaptation effect(CAE). As the most influential theory explaining CAE, the conflict monitoring theory associates conflict monitoring with anterior cingulate cortex(ACC), and associates conflict control with dorsolateral prefrontal cortex(DLPFC) respectively. However, there is no related report providing any direct causal evidence so far. Methods: In the present study, we used the means of transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS) and the classic paradigm of flanker task.Experiment was conducted by within-subject design. Three conditions: cathodal tDCS over left DLPFC, cathodal tDCS over ACC, and the sham stimulation. In the non-sham stimulation conditions, a direct current of 2mA was delivered for about 20 minutes, which accompanied by flanker task. Twenty-six healthy participants completed this experiment. The order of the tDCS conditions was counterbalanced between participants. As others reported, CAE=(RT_(cI)–RT_(cC))-(RT_(iI)–RT_(iC)), and in statistical analysis of data, we used paired-samples t-test to compare RT between three conditions. Results:(1) In the sham stimulation condition, the positive conflict adaptation effect is significant— CAE>0(t=3.059, P=0.005).(2) In the non-sham stimulation conditions, the trend of both longer RTC and longer RTI than the sham stimulation condition is found(although there is no significant difference by statistical test).(3) In the cathodal tDCS over left DLPFC condition, CAE was significantly greater than that in the sham stimulation condition(t=3.724, P=0.001). However, CAE was not significantly different between cathodal tDCS over ACC condition and the sham stimulation condition(t=-0.385, P=0.703). Discussion: Our results indicate that, the function of DLPFC and ACC in conflict adaptation effect is dissociated. Furthermore, this study provides direct evidenceof the explanation of the up-downprocess mechanism to conflict adaptation effect, and suggesting a future approach to neural mechanism of cognitive control.
Background: When performing tasks about cognitive conflict, the brains can adjust current level of cognitive control according to previous experience, which is demonstrated as conflict adaptation effect(CAE). As the most influential theory explaining CAE, the conflict monitoring theory associates conflict monitoring with anterior cingulate cortex(ACC), and associates conflict control with dorsolateral prefrontal cortex(DLPFC) respectively. However, there is no related report providing any direct causal evidence so far. Methods: In the present study, we used the means of transcranial direct current stimulation(tDCS) and the classic paradigm of flanker task.Experiment was conducted by within-subject design. Three conditions: cathodal tDCS over left DLPFC, cathodal tDCS over ACC, and the sham stimulation. In the non-sham stimulation conditions, a direct current of 2mA was delivered for about 20 minutes, which accompanied by flanker task. Twenty-six healthy participants completed this experiment. The order of the tDCS conditions was counterbalanced between participants. As others reported, CAE=(RT_(cI)–RT_(cC))-(RT_(iI)–RT_(iC)), and in statistical analysis of data, we used paired-samples t-test to compare RT between three conditions. Results:(1) In the sham stimulation condition, the positive conflict adaptation effect is significant— CAE>0(t=3.059, P=0.005).(2) In the non-sham stimulation conditions, the trend of both longer RTC and longer RTI than the sham stimulation condition is found(although there is no significant difference by statistical test).(3) In the cathodal tDCS over left DLPFC condition, CAE was significantly greater than that in the sham stimulation condition(t=3.724, P=0.001). However, CAE was not significantly different between cathodal tDCS over ACC condition and the sham stimulation condition(t=-0.385, P=0.703). Discussion: Our results indicate that, the function of DLPFC and ACC in conflict adaptation effect is dissociated. Furthermore, this study provides direct evidenceof the explanation of the up-downprocess mechanism to conflict adaptation effect, and suggesting a future approach to neural mechanism of cognitive control.
引文