Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 169, Issue 2, pp 279–282 | Cite as

The influence of rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on Stroop task performance

  • Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt
  • Rudi De Raedt
  • Chris Baeken
  • Lemke Leyman
  • Hugo D’haenen
Research Note

Abstract

Several studies have demonstrated that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can improve cognitive processing. Neuroimaging studies have shown the engagement of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in executive functioning, and more specifically during selective attention. In the present study, the influence of high-frequency rTMS over the left DLPFC on Stroop task performance in healthy female volunteers was investigated. As expected, reaction time on both the incongruent and congruent trials decreased significantly after stimulation, and there was no difference with regard to the Stroop interference effect. Mood remained unchanged after rTMS. Such a pattern is consistent with the role of the left DLPFC in implementing top–down attentional control.

Keywords

RTMS Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex Stroop Executive functioning Top down attentional control 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant from the Scientific Fund W. Gepts AZ VUB. The authors thank Prof. Dr. R. Luypaert, P. Clerinckx, P. Van Schuurbeeck from the department of radiology of the AZ VUB technical assistance in data collection and MRI data analysis.

References

  1. Banich MT, Milham MP, Jacobson BP, Webb A, Wszalek T, Cohen NJ, Kramer AF (2001) Attentional selection and the processing of task-irrelevant information: insights from fMRI examinations of the Stroop task. Cogn Brain Res 134:459–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bechara A, Damasio AR (2005) The somatic marker hypothesis: a neural theory of economic decision. Games Econ Behav 52(2):336–372MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen JD, Dunbar K, McClelland JL (1990) On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychol Rev 97(3):332–361PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Damasio AR (1996) The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 351(1346):1413–1420PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Erickson KI, Milham MP, Colcombe SJ, Kramer AF, Banich MT, Webb A, Cohen NJ (2004) Behavioural conflict anterior cingulated cortex, and experiment duration: implication of diverging data. Hum Brain Mapping 21:98–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hadland KA, Rushworth MFS, Passingham RE, Jahanshahi M, Rothwell JC (2001) Interference with performance of a response selection task that has no working memory component: an rTMS comparison of the dorsolateral prefrontal and medial frontal cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 13:1097–1108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Harrison BJ, Shaw M, Yücel M, Purcell R, Brewer WJ, Strother SC, Rgan GF, Olver JS, Nathan PJ, Pantelis C (2004) Functional connectivity during Stroop task performance. Neuroimage 24:181–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hoffman RE, Boutros NN, Hu S et al (2000) Transcranial magnetic stimulation and auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia. Lancet 355(9209):1073–1075 [letter]Google Scholar
  9. Lezak MD (2004) Neuropsychological Assessment, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Loo CK, Taylor JL, Gandevia SC, McDarmont BN, Mitchell PB, Sachdev PS (2000) Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in controlled treatment studies: are some “sham” forms active? Biolo Psychiatr 47(4):325–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. MacDonald I, Angus W (2000) Dissociating the role of the Dorsolateral Prefrontal and Anterior Cingulate cortex in cognitive control. Science 288:1835–1841CrossRefPubMedADSGoogle Scholar
  12. Martin JLR, Barbanoj MJ, Schlaeper TE, Thompson E, Pérez V, Kulisevsky J (2003) Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of depression: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatr 182:480–491CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Milham MP, Banich MT, Barad V (2003) Competition for priority in processing increases prefrontal cortex’s involvement in top-down control: an event-related fMRI study of the stroop task. Cogn Brain Res 17(Suppl 2):212–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moser DJ, Jorge RE, Manes F, Paradiso S, Benjamin MJ, Robinson RG (2002) Improved executive functioning following repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neurology 58:1288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Rushworth MFS, Hadland KA, Paus T, Sipila PK (2002) Role of the Human Medial Frontal Cortex in Task Switching: A Combined fMRI and TMS Study. J Neurophysiol 87:2577–2592PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E et al (1998) The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatr 59(Suppl 20):22–33;quiz 34–57Google Scholar
  17. Schneider W, Eschmann A, Zuccolotto A (2002) E-prime reference guide. Psychology Software Tools, Inc, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  18. Shajahan PM, Glabus MF, Steele JD, Doris AB, Anderson K, Jenkins JA, Goodings PA, Ebmeier KP (2002) Left dorso-lateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation affects cortical excitability and functional connectivity, but does not impair cognition in major depression. Progress Neuro-Psychopharmacol Biol Psychiatr 26(5):945–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stroop JR (1935) Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol 18:643–662Google Scholar
  20. Van Strien (2001) Handvoorkeur en taaldominantie. Neuropraxis 2:10–15Google Scholar
  21. Wassermann EM (1998) Risk and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. In: Report and suggested guidelines from the International Workshop on the Safety of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 108(Suppl 1):1–16Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt
    • 1
  • Rudi De Raedt
    • 1
  • Chris Baeken
    • 2
  • Lemke Leyman
    • 1
  • Hugo D’haenen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Academic Hospital, Department of PsychiatryFree University of Brussels (V.U.B.)BrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations