Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Brief Communications

The Mental Cost of Cognitive Enhancement

Teresa Iuculano and Roi Cohen Kadosh
Journal of Neuroscience 6 March 2013, 33 (10) 4482-4486; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4927-12.2013
Teresa Iuculano
1Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, United Kingdom,
2Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London WC1N 3AR, United Kingdom, and
3Stanford Cognitive and Systems Neuroscience Laboratory, Palo Alto, California 94304
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roi Cohen Kadosh
1Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3UD, United Kingdom,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    Example of stimuli and the numerical Stroop task. A, Everyday digits and their corresponding artificial digits that were used to create the new numerical system. Each everyday digit appears above its corresponding artificial digit. Over 6 d of training, participants were instructed to refer to the artificial digits as representing various magnitudes and to decide on each learning trial which one of the two stimuli has a larger magnitude, while receiving visual feedback for their decision. Only adjacent pairs have been presented during this phase. B, An example for congruent and incongruent trials with artificial digits from the numerical Stroop task. In the current example, the symbols corresponding to the Arabic digits 3 and 8 appear on the left and right sides of a congruent and an incongruent trial, respectively. Participants were asked to compare the stimuli according to their physical size while ignoring their numerical meaning. On congruent trials, the larger number appeared in larger font, whereas on incongruent trials the larger number appeared in smaller font. The numerical Stroop effect (incongruent vs congruent) indicates the slowing in the decision time when numbers are irrelevant to the task and are therefore processed automatically (Henik and Tzelgov, 1982). Nonadjacent pairs have been presented in this task to examine transitive inference from the learned material (Tzelgov et al., 2000).

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    Learning functions for the three groups. Top, PPC group. Middle, Sham group. Bottom, DLPFC group. The slope for the PPC group (top) is steeper than the other two (middle, bottom), indicating faster learning. Analysis of the learning rate gave statistical support to this result by showing a significant difference between the learning rate for each group that was best explained by a linear trend: PPC > sham > DLPFC (p < 0.006); 92% of the variance explained.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    Double dissociation between learning rate and automaticity as a function of brain stimulation. Although the speed of learning has been the fastest for PPC stimulation and slowest for the DLPFC stimulation, the automatic processing of the learned material showed exactly the opposite pattern. A linear trend analysis (group [PPC < sham < DLPFC], and task [learning rate ≠ numerical Stroop effect, RTincongruent − RTcongruent]) explained 99% of the variance (p < 0.006). Data are mean ± SEM.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Reaction time in the numerical Stroop task with artificial digits and everyday digits, as a function of TDCS group for congruent, neutral, and incongruent conditions

    TDCS groupCongruityArtificial digits (ms)Everyday digits (ms)
    MeanSEMMeanSEM
    PPCCongruent4624538317
    Neutral4294140015
    Incongruent4705643623
    ShamCongruent4563939315
    Neutral4573540013
    Incongruent4744842820
    DLPFCCongruent4764940619
    Neutral4844541417
    Incongruent5686144425
    • SEM refers to the standard error of the mean.

Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 33 (10)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 33, Issue 10
6 Mar 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Mental Cost of Cognitive Enhancement
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
The Mental Cost of Cognitive Enhancement
Teresa Iuculano, Roi Cohen Kadosh
Journal of Neuroscience 6 March 2013, 33 (10) 4482-4486; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4927-12.2013

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
The Mental Cost of Cognitive Enhancement
Teresa Iuculano, Roi Cohen Kadosh
Journal of Neuroscience 6 March 2013, 33 (10) 4482-4486; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4927-12.2013
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Heteromodal Cortical Areas Encode Sensory-Motor Features of Word Meaning
  • Pharmacologically Counteracting a Phenotypic Difference in Cerebellar GABAA Receptor Response to Alcohol Prevents Excessive Alcohol Consumption in a High Alcohol-Consuming Rodent Genotype
  • Neuromuscular NMDA Receptors Modulate Developmental Synapse Elimination
Show more Brief Communications
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.