Transcranial direct-current stimulation of core language areas facilitates novel word acquisition

Yury Shtyrov,Ekaterina Perikova,Margarita Filippova,Alexander Kirsanov,Evgeny Blagovechtchenski,Olga Shcherbakova

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2024.107992

2024-10-15

Abstract:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive neuromodulation technique that can alter the state of the stimulated brain area and thereby affect neurocognitive processes and resulting behavioural performance. Previous studies using tDCS to address the language function have shown disparate results, particularly with respect to language learning and word acquisition. To fill this gap, this study aimed at systematically addressing the effects of tDCS of core left-hemispheric language cortices on the brain mechanisms underpinning two main neurocognitive strategies of word learning: implicit inference-based Fast Mapping (FM) and direct instruction-based Explicit Encoding (EE). Prior to a word-learning session, 160 healthy participants were given 15 min of either anodal or cathodal tDCS of Wernicke's or Broca's areas, or a control sham (placebo) stimulation, in a between-group design. Each participant then learned sixteen novel words (eight through FM and eight through EE) in a contextual word-picture association session. Moreover, these words were learnt either perceptually via auditory exposure combined with a graphical image of the novel object, or in an articulatory mode, where the participants additionally had to overtly articulate the novel items. These learning conditions were fully counterbalanced across participants, stimuli and tDCS groups. Learning outcomes were tested at both lexical and semantic levels using two tasks: recognition and word-picture matching. EE and FM conditions produced similar outcomes, indicating comparable efficiency of the respective learning strategies. At the same time, articulatory learning produced generally better results than non-articulatory exposure, yielding higher recognition accuracies and shorter latencies in both tasks. Crucially, real tDCS led to global outcome improvements, demonstrated by faster (compared to sham) reactions, as well as some accuracy changes. There was also evidence of more specific tDCS effects: better word-recognition accuracy for EE vs. FM following cathodal stimulation as well as more expressed improvements in recognition accuracy and reaction times for anodal Broca's and cathodal Wernicke's stimulation, particularly for unarticulated FM items. These learning mode-specific effects support the notion of partially distinct brain mechanisms underpinning these two learning strategies. Overall, numerically largest improvements were observed for anodal Broca's tDCS, whereas the least expressed benefits of tDCS for learning were measured after anodal Wernicke stimulation. Finally, we did not find any inhibitory effects of either tDCS polarity in any of the comparisons. We conclude that tDCS of core language areas exerts a general facilitatory effect on new word acquisition with some limited specificity to learning protocols - the result that may be of potential applied value for future research aimed at ameliorating learning deficits and language disorders.