Behavioral and neurological outcomes of anodal tDCS on stress-impaired working memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress has been found to impair working memory performance. Neurologically, this phenomenon has been associated with a decrease in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) activity. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) increases cortical excitability, and has been shown to reduce stress-induced working memory impairments when applied over the dlPFC. In the current study, we used fNIRS to investigate the mechanism in which stress-induced working memory impairments are buffered by anodal tDCS. 28 healthy participants were recruited and randomized to receive either anodal or sham tDCS to the right dlPFC. For stress induction, all participants underwent a modified version of the Montreal Imaging Stress Task. Participants’ working memory performance, right dlPFC hemodynamic response and mental fatigue were measured at three time points: baseline, post-stress, and post-tDCS. Additionally, participants’ trait anxiety was measured and used as a covariate in our analyses. Although none of our results achieved significance, we descriptively observed that working memory performance improves post-stress from baseline, and decreases slightly from post-stress to post-tDCS. We also observed right dlPFC oxyhemoglobin hemodynamic response following the same trend as working memory performance. We did not observe much difference in working memory performance between tDCS conditions across timepoints, hence we are unable to conclude that a-tDCS is effective in buffering against stress-induced working memory deficits. We observed that fatigue increases across time, which aligned with our expectations. Lastly, we noted that trait anxiety may not be a useful covariate in influencing working memory performance. \n \nKeywords: working memory, stress, tDCS, fNIRS, mental fatigue, trait anxiety
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".