PCI Registered Reports

Announcements

Please note that we will be CLOSED to ALL SUBMISSIONS from 1 December 2024 through 12 January 2025 to give our recommenders and reviewers a holiday break.

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

Back

891

Title *

Dose-response of tDCS effects on motor learning and cortical excitability: a preregistered studyuse asterix (*) to get italics

Authors *

Gavin Hsu, Zhenous Hadi Jafari, Abdelrahman Ahmed, Dylan J. Edwards, Leonardo G. Cohen, Lucas C. ParraPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year *

2024

Picture

Abstract *

Background: Multiple studies have demonstrated that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) can influence corticospinal excitability and motor skill acquisition. However, the evidence for these effects is inconsistent, and a common neural substrate for these effects has not been directly demonstrated. To address this, we hypothesized that higher tDCS intensities would produce more robust effects, and uncover their relationship. Methods: In this preregistered study, 120 participants engaged in a motor skill learning task while receiving tDCS with posterior-to-anterior currents through M1. We employed a double-blind, between-subjects design, with groups of 4mA, 6mA, or sham stimulation, while ensuring balanced groups in terms of typing speed. Cortical excitability was assessed via motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and TMS-evoked potentials (TEPs) before and after motor skill learning with concurrent tDCS. Results: tDCS at these higher intensities was well-tolerated, and motor learning correlated with pretraining typing speed. Planned analyses, found no dose-response effect of tDCS on motor skill performance or MEP amplitude. This suggests that, under our experimental conditions, tDCS did not significantly modulate motor skill learning or corticospinal excitability. Furthermore, there was no correlation between motor performance and MEP, and thus no evidence for a common neural substrate. Exploratory analyses, found an increase in MEP and TEP amplitudes following the sequence learning task. Motor skill gains positively correlated with TEP changes over the stimulated M1, which were more negative with increasing tDCS intensity. Conclusion: The effects of tDCS on motor skill learning and MEPs, if they exist, may require particular experimental conditions that have not been tested here. Pre-registration: https://osf.io/jyuev (in-principle acceptance: 2024/06/05)

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords (optional)

tDCS, TMS, EEG, neuromodulation, motor learning, synaptic plasticity

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields *

Engineering, Medical Sciences

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

Submission date

2024-09-02 19:07:02

Recommender

Christina Artemenko

Reviewers

or Register
Submit a report