No Frequency-Specific Effect of Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation on Resting EEG.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) is a form of noninvasive transcranial electrical stimulation that applies alternating current in various randomized frequencies to the cortex, thereby improving cognitive functioning in multiple domains. However, the precise mechanism of tRNS, as well as its impact on human electroencephalography (EEG), remains unclear. This is partly because most studies have used tRNS in conjunction with a cognitive task, making it difficult to tease apart whether the observed changes in EEG are a result of tRNS, the cognitive task, or their interaction. METHODS: Forty-nine healthy individuals participated in this study and were randomly assigned to active tRNS (n = 24) and sham (n = 25) groups. tRNS was delivered for 20 minutes over Fp1/Fp2 and Oz. Resting-state EEG data were collected before and after either tRNS or sham stimulation. RESULTS: Cluster-based permutation tests using FieldTrip revealed no frequency-specific effect of tRNS on resting-state EEG data across four frequency bands (theta, alpha, beta, gamma). CONCLUSIONS: These observations suggest that tRNS itself does not target or alter specific EEG frequencies. Rather, tRNS most likely interacts with the cognitive task/activity at hand to produce an observable difference in post-tRNS EEG. Positive tRNS-EEG findings from previous studies are also likely to have resulted from the interactive and cognitive activity-dependent nature of tRNS.

The hidden arrow in the FedEx logo: Do we really unconsciously "see" it?

The FedEx logo makes clever use of figure-ground ambiguity to create an "invisible" arrow in the background space between "E" and "x". Most designers believe the hidden arrow can convey an unconscious impression of speed and precision about the FedEx brand, which may influence subsequent behavior. To test this assumption, we designed similar images with hidden arrows to serve as endogenous (but camouflaged) directional cues in a Posner's orienting task, where a cueing effect would suggest subliminal processing of the hidden arrow. Overall, we observed no cue congruency effect, unless the arrow is explicitly highlighted (Experiment 4). However, there was a general effect of prior knowledge: when people were under pressure to suppress background information, those who knew about the arrow could do so faster in all congruence conditions (i.e., neutral, congruent, incongruent), although they fail to report seeing the arrow during the experiment. This was true in participants from North America who had heard of the FedEx arrow before (Experiment 1 & 3), and also in our Taiwanese sample who were just informed of such design (Experiment 2). These results can be well explained by the Biased Competition Model in figure-ground research, and together suggest: (1) people do not unconsciously perceive the FedEx arrow, at least not enough to exhibit a cueing effect in attention, but (2) knowing about the arrow can fundamentally change the way we visually process these negative-space logos in the future, making people react faster to images with negative space regardless of the hidden content.