| Literature DB >> 33828509 |
Andrea Ghiani1, Marcello Maniglia2,3, Luca Battaglini1,4,5, David Melcher6,7, Luca Ronconi8,9.
Abstract
Neurophysiological studies in humans employing magneto- (MEG) and electro- (EEG) encephalography increasingly suggest that oscillatory rhythmic activity of the brain may be a core mechanism for binding sensory information across space, time, and object features to generate a unified perceptual representation. To distinguish whether oscillatory activity is causally related to binding processes or whether, on the contrary, it is a mere epiphenomenon, one possibility is to employ neuromodulatory techniques such as transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS). tACS has seen a rising interest due to its ability to modulate brain oscillations in a frequency-dependent manner. In the present review, we critically summarize current tACS evidence for a causal role of oscillatory activity in spatial, temporal, and feature binding in the context of visual perception. For temporal binding, the emerging picture supports a causal link with the power and the frequency of occipital alpha rhythms (8-12 Hz); however, there is no consistent evidence on the causal role of the phase of occipital tACS. For feature binding, the only study available showed a modulation by occipital alpha tACS. The majority of studies that successfully modulated oscillatory activity and behavioral performance in spatial binding targeted parietal areas, with the main rhythms causally linked being the theta (~7 Hz) and beta (~18 Hz) frequency bands. On the other hand, spatio-temporal binding has been directly modulated by parieto-occipital gamma (~40-60 Hz) and alpha (10 Hz) tACS, suggesting a potential role of cross-frequency coupling when binding across space and time. Nonetheless, negative or partial results have also been observed, suggesting methodological limitations that should be addressed in future research. Overall, the emerging picture seems to support a causal role of brain oscillations in binding processes and, consequently, a certain degree of plasticity for shaping binding mechanisms in visual perception, which, if proved to have long lasting effects, can find applications in different clinical populations.Entities:
Keywords: brain oscillations; feature binding; spatial binding; tACS; temporal binding
Year: 2021 PMID: 33828509 PMCID: PMC8019716 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.643677
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1Illustrative representation of the study and results by Battaglini et al. (2020b). (A) mc-tACS montage: the stimulation electrode (red) was placed on PO8, the return electrodes (blue) were placed on Oz, P4, PO10, and TP8. (B) Schematic representation of one trial in the two-flash fusion task: two flashes were shown either on the left [as depicted in (B)] or right hemifield with a variable inter-stimulus interval ranging from 20 to 80 ms in steps of 10 ms. Participants were asked to report the number of perceived flashes. (C) Illustrative representation of the main results: the two-flash rate is shown as a function of the inter-stimulus interval between the two flashes for the three stimulation conditions, separately for the left hemifield (upper panel) and right hemifield (lower panel): 10 Hz tACS modulated the number of reported flashes, but only in the contralateral hemifield to stimulation (i.e., left hemifield).
Figure 2Illustrative representation of the study and results by Minami and Amano (2017). (A) tACS montage: the stimulation electrode (red) was placed on Oz, the return electrode (blue) was placed on Pz. (B) Schematic representation of the motion-induced spatial conflict task: participants reported whether the illusory jitter (upper visual field) was faster as compared to a physical jitter that could have 7 possible jitter frequencies (lower visual field). (C) Illustrative representation of the main results: MEG power spectrum of one participant is shown in the three stimulation conditions: IAF in the no stimulation condition was modulated in opposite directions according to tACS frequency (i.e., IAF −1 Hz or IAF + 1 Hz). (D) Psychometric function for the same participant in (C). Perceived illusory jitter frequency changed depending on tACS stimulation frequency, congruently with IAF modulation.
Figure 3Illustrative representation of the study and results by Cecere et al. (2015). (A) tACS montage: the stimulation electrode (red) was placed on Oz, the return electrode (blue) was placed on Cz. (B) Schematic representation of the flash-beep task: a flash was shown together with a first beep, followed by a second beep after a variable time interval between 36 and 204 ms (12 ms steps). Participants were asked to report the number of perceived flashes. (C) Illustrative representation of the main results: the average perceived illusion is shown as a function of inter-beep delay for the three stimulation conditions: the size of the temporal window of illusion was modulated in opposite directions by higher (IAF + 2 Hz; blue) or lower (IAF – 2 Hz; yellow) tACS frequencies.
Figure 4Illustrative representation of the study and results by Ronconi et al. (2020a). (A) mc-tACS montage: the stimulation electrode (red) was placed on P4, the return electrodes (blue) were placed on C4, Pz, O2, and P8. (B) Schematic representation of the SegInt task: two displays were successively shown, separated by a blank interval. Both displays presented seven full black annuli, an “odd element” (blue circle), with just half annulus in each display and an empty location (yellow circle) in both displays. Participants were asked to indicate either the position of the odd element (segregation) or the empty location (integration). (C) The proportion of correct responses in integration and segregation trials was not significantly different between IAF – 2 Hz tACS and IAF + 2 Hz tACS. (D) Temporal integration and segregation accuracy as a function of tACS phase bin. The best fitting sinusoidal function was not significant, suggesting that in this study, tACS was not able to reliably modulate segregation and integration processes in a sinusoidal fashion.
Summary of tACS studies investigating the causal role of brain oscillations in binding mechanisms.
| Temporal binding | Battaglini et al. ( | mc-tACS StarStim8, NIC | 1 × 4 channels: PO8 (anode)-Oz, P4, PO10, TP8 (cathodes) in 10–10 system. For all electrodes: 2 cm diameter | Target frequency: 10 Hz | EEG pre- and post-tACS | Two-flash fusion task | 10 Hz tACS reduced the temporal resolution of perception | 10 Hz tACS did not selectively increase alpha power after stimulation |
| Minami and Amano ( | AM-tACS, NeuroConn | Pz-Oz (5 × 7 cm2) in 10–20 system | Target frequency: IAF ± 1 Hz | MEG pre- and during tACS | Motion-induced spatial conflict | IAF + 1 Hz and IAF – 1 Hz modulated the perceived jitter frequency | AM-tACS successfully manipulated PAF | |
| Cecere et al. ( | Standard tACS | Oz (anode,9 cm2)-Cz (cathode, 35 cm2) in 10–20 system | Target frequency: IAF ± 2 Hz | EEG pre-tACS | Flash-beep task (sound-induced double flash illusion) | Compared to IAF tACS, IAF+2 Hz tACS (IAF– 2 Hz) narrowed (broadened) the temporal window of the sound induced double flash illusion | No M/EEG during or after stimulation | |
| Ronconi et al. ( | mc-tACS | 1 × 4 channels: P4 (anode)-C4, Pz, O2, P8 (cathode) in 10–10 system. For all electrodes: 2 cm diameter | Target frequency: IAF ± 2 Hz | EEG pre- and post-tACS | Segregation/integration task | IAF ± 2 Hz mc-tACS did not modulate integration/segregation performance, as expected | IAF ± 2 Hz mc-tACS did not modulate endogenous IAF | |
| Spatial binding | Stonkus et al. ( | 4 channel DC Stimulator, NeuroConn | PO7, CP6 (anodes, diameter 3.7 cm)—POz (cathode, diameter 3.7 cm) in 10–20 system | Target frequency: 7 Hz (in-phase or out-of-phase) | EEG post-tACS | Contour integration task | In-phase stimulation improved contour detection performance. However, anti-phase stimulation did not show any effect | Prestimulus tACS caused entrainment echoes |
| Battaglini et al. ( | mc-tACS | 1 × 4 channels: P4 (anode)-C4, Pz, O2, P8 (cathodes) in 10–10 system. For all electrodes: 2 cm diameter | Target frequency: 18 Hz | EEG pre- and post-tACS | Letter orientation discrimination task | 18 Hz tACS improved performance in a crowded condition No tACS phase modulation was found | 18 Hz tACS selectively increased beta power after stimulation | |
| Feature binding | Zhang et al. ( | DC stimulator, | Main experiment: PO3 (anode)-Cz (cathode) Control: PO4 (anode) -Cz (cathode) (all electrodes: 35 cm2) in 10–20 system | Target frequency: IAF (exp 1); IAF ± 2 Hz (exp 2) | EEG pre-tACS | Bistable color-motion binding task | IAF tACS reduced the time proportion of active (illusory) binding. IAF+2 Hz and IAF – 2 Hz tACS selectively enhanced and reduced perceptual switch rate | No M/EEG during or after stimulation |
| Spatio-temporal Binding | Strüber et al. ( | DC stimulator, | Experiment 1–2 (out-of-phase): P7-PO7 (5 x 7 cm) and P8-PO8 (5 × 7 cm) in 10–10 system | Target frequency: 40 Hz (in-phase or out-of-phase) | EEG pre- and post-tACS | Stroboscopic alternative motion paradigm | Anti-phase 40 Hz tACS decreased the proportion of perceived horizontal motion | Anti-phase 40 Hz tACS increased interhemispheric gamma coherence |
| Helfrich et al. ( | mc-tACS, DC stimulator Plus | 1 × 4 channel tACS on left and right extra-striate visual cortex | Target frequency: 40 Hz (in-phase or out-of-phase) | EEG pre- during and post-tACS | Stroboscopic alternative motion paradigm | 40 Hz in-phase (out-of-phase) stimulation promoted the perception of the horizontal motion (vertical motion) | In-phase and out-of-phase 40 Hz tACS modulated gamma interhemispheric synchrony, but not gamma power. 40 Hz tACS decreased alpha power | |
| Kar and Krekelberg ( | Standard tACS | PO7-PO3 (anode)-Cz (cathode) in 10–20 system. For all electrodes: 7.60 cm diameter | Target frequency: 10 Hz | No M/EEG | Motion discrimination task | 10 Hz tACS improved motion discrimination sensitivity likely by reducing motion adaptation | No M/EEG during or after stimulation | |
| Cabral-Calderin et al. ( | DC stimulator Plus, | Oz (anode, 16 cm2)-Cz (cathode, 35 cm2) in 10-20 system | Target frequency: 10 Hz; 60 Hz; 80 Hz | No M/EEG | Structure-from-Motion stimulus | 60 Hz tACS, but not 10 Hz tACS, increased the perceptual switch rate, promoting perceptual reorganization during ambiguous stimulation | No M/EEG during or after stimulation |
The reported tACS amplitude in Stimulation parameters is peak-to-peak. AM, amplitude-modulated; mc, multi-channels; tACS, transcranial alternating current stimulation; IAF, individual alpha frequency; mA, milliAmpere; μA, microAmpere; PAF, peak alpha frequency.
Figure 5Illustrative representation of the study and results by Battaglini et al. (2020a). (A) mc-tACS montage: the stimulation electrode (red) was placed on P4, the return electrodes (blue) were placed on C4, Pz, O2, and P8. (B) Schematic representation of one trial in the letter orientation discrimination task. H letters (i.e., flankers) could have 7 possible distances from the T letter (i.e., target), creating different levels of visual crowding. Participants were asked to indicate the T orientation in each trial. (C) Illustrative representation of the main results: the proportion of correct responses is shown as a function of the target-flankers distance for the three stimulation conditions, separately for the left hemifield (upper panel) and right hemifield (lower panel): 18 Hz tACS (yellow) increased participants performance, but only in the contralateral hemifield to stimulation (i.e., left hemifield).
Figure 6Illustrative representation of the study and results by Zhang et al. (2019). (A) tACS montage: the stimulation electrode (red) was placed on PO3, the return electrode (blue) was placed on Cz in the main experiment. (B) Illustrative representation of the bistable feature binding stimulus. The visual stimulus was formed by red or green dots that moved either downwards or upwards (as indicated by the gray dotted arrow). The stimulus was divided into an induction part and an effect part, where color and motion were presented in opposite directions (left panel). The stimulus could be either perceived as its physical appearance (central panel) or as active binding, where same-colored dots are perceived moving in the same direction in the induction and effect part (right panel). (C,D) Illustrative representation of the main results. (C) IAP negatively correlated with the reported active binding time, as shown by EEG results (left panel). IAF tACS significantly reduced the reported active binding time compared to sham, likely by enhancing the alpha power (right panel). (D) IAF positively correlated with the perceptual switch rate, as shown by EEG results (right panel). tACS at higher IAF frequencies (e.g., IAF + 2 Hz) increased the perceptual switch rate, likely reducing the perceptual window of physical and/or active binding (right panel). *means that a significant difference was reported.
Figure 7Illustrative representation of the study and results by Helfrich et al. (2014a). (A) mc-tACS montage: in the in-phase condition (left panel) electrodes were positioned to optimally stimulate right and left occipital-parietal regions. In the out-of-phase condition (right panel) electrodes were positioned according to Strüber et al. (2014), covering positions P7-PO7 and P8-PO8. (B) Schematic representation of the stroboscopic alternative motion (SAM) task: participants could alternatively perceive either a horizontal or vertical percept. (C,D) Illustrative representation of the main results. (C) In-phase (out-of-phase) interhemispheric gamma tACS effectively increased (decreased) interhemispheric gamma-band coherence. (D) The motion ratio (i.e., timehorizonal/timetotal ) is a measure of the mean duration of horizontal motion perception. During 40 Hz tACS, in-phase stimulation significantly increased the perceived motion ratio compared to sham or post-stimulation. *means that a significant difference was reported.
Some future research questions that may be addressed by future studies interested both in fundamental and clinical aspects of visual binding processes.
| •M/EEG studies showed a correlation between alpha/theta frequency and temporal binding. However, tACS studies mainly focused on alpha activity, leaving the potential causal role of theta activity largely unexplored. Future research may attempt to investigate whether and in which conditions theta activity causally supports temporal binding |