English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Transcranial direct current stimulation ( tDCS ) can alter cortical excitability, neural plasticity, and cognitive‐behavioral performance; however, its effects are known to vary across studies. A partial account of this variability relates to individual differences in dopamine function. Indeed, dopaminergic manipulations alter the physiological and cognitive‐behavioral effects of  tDCS , and gene polymorphisms related to dopamine have predicted individual response to online  tDCS  (i.e., stimulation overlapping with the critical task). Notably, the role of individual differences in dopamine has not yet been properly assessed in the effect of offline  tDCS  (i.e., stimulation prior to the critical task). We investigated if and how the  COMT  Val 158 Met polymorphism (rs4680) modulates the after‐effect of prefrontal  tDCS  on verbal working memory ( WM ). One hundred and thirty‐nine participants were genotyped for the  COMT  Val 158 Met polymorphism and received anodal‐over‐left, cathodal‐over‐right ( AL ‐ CR ), cathodal‐over‐left, anodal‐over‐right ( CL ‐ AR ), or sham stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in a between‐subjects, pretest–posttest study design.  WM  was assessed using the N‐back task. The results provide no evidence that the  COMT  polymorphism impacts the after‐effect of prefrontal  tDCS  on  WM . Taken together with previous findings on dopamine and  tDCS  interactions, the results of the present study suggest that (a) indirect markers of dopamine (such as  COMT ) are differently related to online and offline effects of  tDCS , and (b) findings from studies involving pharmacological manipulation should be generalized with caution to findings of inter‐individual differences. In sum, we argue that state (i.e., a manipulation of) and trait (i.e., baseline) differences in dopamine may exert different effects on online and offline  tDCS .

The COMT Val 158 Met polymorphism does not modulate the after‐effect of tDCS on working memory