4.5 Article

The time course of ineffective sham-blinding during low-intensity (1 mA) transcranial direct current stimulation

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 50, Issue 8, Pages 3380-3388

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ejn.14497

Keywords

placebo; primary motor cortex; reaction time; sham; tDCS

Categories

Funding

  1. Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellowship [209209/Z/17/Z]
  2. Wellcome Trust [209209/Z/17/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Studies using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) typically compare an active protocol relative to a shorter sham (placebo) protocol. Both protocols are presumed to be perceptually identical on the scalp, and thus represent an effective method of delivering double-blinded experimental designs. However, participants often show above-chance accuracy when asked which condition involved active/sham retrospectively. We assessed the time course of sham-blinding during active and sham tDCS. We predicted that participants would be aware that the current is switched on for longer in the active versus sham protocol. Thirty-two adults were tested in a preregistered, double-blinded, within-subjects design. A forced-choice reaction time task was undertaken before, during and after active (10 min 1 mA) and sham (20 s 1 mA) tDCS. The anode was placed over the left primary motor cortex (C3) to target the right hand, and the cathode on the right forehead. Two probe questions were asked every 30 s: Is the stimulation on? and How sure are you?. Distinct periods of non-overlapping confidence intervals were identified between conditions, totalling 5 min (57.1% of the total difference in stimulation time). These began immediately after sham ramp-down and lasted until the active protocol had ended. We therefore show a failure of placebo control during 1 mA tDCS. These results highlight the need to develop more effective methods of sham-blinding during transcranial electrical stimulation protocols, even when delivered at low-intensity current strengths.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available