Comparison of Cognitive Training Method and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) on the Visual Attention Processes in the Students with Special Learning Disorders

Document Type : Original Article


Department of Psychology, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran



Introduction: Learning disabilities creates long-lasting damages to any individual in the activities dependent on academic skills. The present study was aimed to assess and compare the cognitive training method and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) on the visual attention processes in the students with special learning disorders.
Methods: Forty-five students were selected based on a purposive sampling method and assigned to three groups: the control group and two experimental groups. (Each containing 15 individuals) based on a simple randomized method. The study has been conducted based on a semi-experimental design of pretest-posttest type with control group. One of the experimental groups received cognitive training for a period of 20 to 30 sessions, each lasting for 45 minutes (twice a week) and the other group was subjected to transcranial direct current stimulation for 20 minutes during ten consecutive days. The statistical method of choice was Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA).
Results: The results of data analysis using analysis of covariance indicated that both of the cognitive training method and the transcranial tDCS are effective in the visual attention processes (P<0.01).
Conclusion: Cognitive training and the transcranial tDCS methods can be applied for improving the visual attention processes in students with special learning disabilities.


  1. References

    1. Arjmandnia, A.A., Asbaghi, M., Afrooz, G., Rahmanian, M. The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on improving working memory performance in children with mathematical disorder. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2016; 6(1): 7-25. [In Persian]
    2. Brueggeman, A.E. Diagnostic assessment of learning disabilities in childhood. Publisher: Springer-Verlag New York. 2014.
    3. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. American Psychiatric Association: 5th ed. Arlington, USA. 2013.
    4. Kirk, S., Gallagher, J.J., Coleman, M.R., Anastasiow, N.J. Educating exceptional children. Cengage Learning. 2011.
    5. Moshirian Farahi, S.M., Zarif Golbar Yazdi, H., Amin Yazdi, S.A. Investigate visual-spatial attention and visual-manual dexterity skills in children with learning disorders and compare with normal children. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2016; 4(3): 21-30. [In Persian]
    6. Diamond, A. Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 2013; 64: 135-168
    7. Anderson, P.J. Assessment and development of executive functioning (EF) in childhood. Child Neuropsychology, 2002; 8(2): 71-82.
    8. Loo, S.K., Makeig, S. Clinical utility of EEG in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a research update. Neurotherapeutics, 2012; 9(3): 569-587.
    9. Ebrahimi Kheir Abadi, A. Effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy in attentional bias components of patients with generalized anxiety disorder: A single subject study. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2015; 9(2): 121-128.
    10. Nobahar, M., Shojaei, A. Occupational therapy interventions in visual perception disorders. Exceptional Education, 2016; 5(142): 31-37. [In Persian]
    11. Eysenck, M.W., Keane, M.T. Cognitive psychology: A student's handbook. Psychology press. 2013.
    12. Akbari, F. The effectiveness of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the brain (tDCS) on reducing depressive symptoms among people with Depressive Disorder. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2015; 9(1): 95-101.
    13. Krause, B., Kadosh, R.C. Can transcranial electrical stimulation improve learning difficulties in atypical brain development? A future possibility for cognitive training. Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 2013; 6: 176-194.
    14. Jacobson, L., Ezra, A., Berger, U., Lavidor, M. Modulating oscillatory brain activity correlates of behavioral inhibition using transcranial direct current stimulation. Clinical neurophysiology, 2012; 123(5): 979-984.
    15. Stagg, C.J., Jayaram, G., Pastor, D., Kincses, Z.T., Matthews, P.M., Johansen-Berg, H. Polarity and timing-dependent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation in explicit motor learning. Neuropsychologia, 2011; 49(5): 800-804.
    16. Ahn, H., Woods, A.J., Kunik, M.E., Bhattacharjee, A., Chen, Z., Choi, E., Fillingim, R.B. Efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation over primary motor cortex (anode) and contralateral supraorbital area (cathode) on clinical pain severity and mobility performance in persons with knee osteoarthritis: an experimenter-and participant-blinded, randomized, sham-controlled pilot clinical study. Brain Stimulation: Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research in Neuromodulation, 2017; 10(5): 902-909.
    17. Gögler, N., Willacker, L., Funk, J., Strube, W., Langgartner, S., Napiórkowski, N., Finke, K. Single-session transcranial direct current stimulation induces enduring enhancement of visual processing speed in patients with major depression. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 2017; 267(7): 671-686.
    18. Miler, J.A., Meron, D., Baldwin, D.S., Garner, M. The effect of prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation on attention network function in healthy volunteers. Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface. 2017; 21(4): 355-361.
    19. Bonder, T., Gopher, D., Yeshurun, Y. The joint effects of spatial cueing and transcranial direct current stimulation on visual acuity. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018; 9: 159.
    20. Bray, V.J., Dhillon, H.M., Bell, M.L., Kabourakis, M., Fiero, M.H., Yip, D., Vardy, J.L. Evaluation of a web-based cognitive rehabilitation program in cancer survivors reporting cognitive symptoms after chemotherapy. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2017; 35(2): 217-225.
    21. Bayrami, M., Movahedi, Y., Ahmadi, E. The effectiveness of cognitive rehab on the selective- divided attention and working memory in students with dyslexia & dyscalculia disabilities. Neuropsychology, 2017; 3(8): 9-28. [In Persian]
    22. Mihuta, M.E., Green, H.J., Shum, D.H.K. Efficacy of a web‐based cognitive rehabilitation intervention for adult cancer survivors: A pilot study. European Journal of Cancer Care, 2018; 27(2): e12805. doi: 10.1111/ecc.12805.
    23. Rilo, O., Peña, J., Ojeda, N., Rodríguez-Antigüedad, A., Mendibe-Bilbao, M., Gómez-Gastiasoro, A., Ibarretxe-Bilbao, N. Integrative group-based cognitive rehabilitation efficacy in multiple sclerosis: a randomized clinical trial. Disability and rehabilitation, 2018; 40(2): 208-216.
    24. Bogdanova, Y., Yee, M.K., Ho, V.T., Cicerone, K.D. Computerized cognitive rehabilitation of attention and executive function in acquired brain injury: a systematic review. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 2016; 31(6): 419-433.
    25. Costanzo, F., Rossi, S., Varuzza, C., Varvara, P., Vicari, S., Menghini, D. Long-lasting improvement following tDCS treatment combined with a training for reading in children and adolescents with dyslexia. Neuropsychologia. 2018; DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.03.016.
    26. Heth, I., Lavidor, M. Improved reading measures in adults with dyslexia following transcranial direct current stimulation treatment. Neuropsychologia, 2015; 70: 107-113.
    27. Monsef, F.B., Soleymani, M., Shalchi, B. The effectiveness of neurocognitive rehabilitation on the math performance and working memory of students with dyscalculia. Majallah-i Dānishgāh-i ̒Ulūm-i Pizishkī-i Qum, 2017; 11(5): 63-75. [In Persian]
    28. Nazari, M.A., Dadkhah, M., Hashemi, T. Effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation on dictation errors of students with dysgraphia. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences, 2015; 11(1): 32-41. [In Persian]
    29. Francis, G., Neath, I., VanHorn, D. CogLab on a CD. Publisher: Wadsworth. 2007.
    30. Bayat Mokhtari, L., Aghayousefi, A., Zare, H., Nejati, V. The considering of the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and phonological awareness training on improvement of the visual aspect function of the working memory in children with dyslexia. Neuropsychology, 2017; 3(8): 51-68. [In Persian]
    31. David, L. Social learning theory (bandura), in learning theories. 2019; February 7, 2019,
    32. Baezzat, F., Eizadifard, R. Effect of phonological awareness training package on reduction of spelling errors of primary school students with writing disorder. International Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2012; 6(1): 55-60.
    33. Clark, K.L., Noudoost, B. The role of prefrontal catecholamines in attention and working memory. Frontiers in Neural Circuits, 2014; 8: 33.
    34. Nitsche, M. A., Paulus, W. Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans. Neurology, 2001; 57: 1899-1901.
    35. Ruffini, G., Wendling, F., Merlet, I., Molaee-Ardekani, B., Mekonnen, A., Salvador R., Soria-Frisch, A., Grau, C., Dunne, S., Miranda P.C. Transcranial current brain stimulation (tCS): models and technologies. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2013; 21: 333–345.
    36. Stagg, C. J., Bachtiar V., Johansen-Berg, H. The role of GABA in human motor learning. Current Biology, 2011; 21: 480-484.
    37. Liebetanz, D., Nitsche M. A., Tergau F., Paulus, W. Pharmacological approach to the mechanisms of transcranial DC-stimulation-induced after-effects of human motor cortex excitability. Brain, 2002; 125: 2238-2247.
    38. Jones, K. T., Gözenman, F., Berryhill, M. E. Enhanced long-term memory encoding after parietal neurostimulation. Experimental Brain Research, 2014; 232: 4043-4054.
    39. Pergolizzi, D., Chua, E. F. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the parietal cortex leads to increased false recognition. Neuropsychologia, 2015; 66: 88-98.
    40. Meier, B., Sauter. P. Boosting memory by tDCS to frontal or parietal brain regions? a study of the enactment effect shows no effects for immediate and delayed recognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018; 9: 86.