Melissa McGonnell, Matt Orr, Joan Backman, Shannon A Johnson, Fiona Davidson, Penny Corkum
Examining the role of the visuospatial sketchpad in children's math calculation skills using Baddeley and Hitch's model of working memory
Acta psychologica
psychological refractory period prp effect occurs two stimuli require separate responses presented sequentially particularly short variable time interval fatigue suboptimal psychophysiological state leads changes strategies recent years numerous studies investigated effects transcranial direct current stimulation tdcs motor control present study aimed investigate effects two tdcs methods anodal cathodal prp ten different conditions stimulusonset asynchronies soas nonfatigue mental fatigue conditions participants involved 39 male university students aged 19 25 years pretest assessed using prp measurement tool nonfatigue mental fatigue conditions mental fatigue induced 30min stroop task test consisted two stimuli different soas 50 75 100 150 300 400 600 900 1200 1500 ms first visual stimulus three choices letters b c random soa second stimulus visual stimulus three choices colors red yellow blue presented subsequently participants randomly assigned anodal cathodal sham stimulation groups underwent four consecutive sessions tdcs stimulation anodal cathodal stimulation groups 20 min tdcs stimulation applied plpfc area session sham group stimulation artificially applied participants assessed using measurement tools pretest phase posttest phase one day last stimulation session followup phase four days inferential statistics include mixed anova oneway anova independent dependent ttests findings indicated response time second stimulus longer lower soas however significant difference groups regard additionally significant difference response time second stimulus fatigue nonfatigue conditions groups therefore tdcs significant effect significant difference mental fatigue nonfatigue conditions psychological refractory period moreover lower soas prp longer higher soas conditions fatigue active stimulation groups anodal cathodal performed better sham stimulation group higher soas considering difference response stimuli different soas central aspects response simultaneously parallel fatigue also affects parallel processing study supports response integration phenomenon prp predicts increase response time first stimulus interval presentation two stimuli increases finding contradicts bottleneck model study effectiveness cathodal anodal tdcs response time second stimulus prp found small