A new study published Tuesday in PLOS Biology suggests that mild electrical stimulation can boost arithmetic performance – and offers fresh insight into the brain mechanisms behind mathematical ability, along with a potential way to optimise learning.
The findings could eventually help narrow cognitive gaps and help build a more intellectually equitable society, the authors argue.
“Different people have different brains, and their brains control a lot in their life,” said Roi Cohen Kadosh, a neuroscientist at the University of Surrey who led the research.
“We think about the environment – if you go to the right school, if you have the right teacher – but it’s also our biology.”
Cohen Kadosh and colleagues recruited 72 University of Oxford students, scanning their brains to measure connectivity between three key regions.
Participants then tackled math problems that required either calculating answers or recalling memorised solutions.
They found that stronger connections between the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which governs executive function, and the posterior parietal cortex, involved in memory, predicted better calculation performance.
When the researchers applied a painless form of brain stimulation using electrode-fitted caps – a technique known as transcranial random noise stimulation – the low performers saw their scores jump by 25–29%.
The team believes the stimulation works by enhancing the excitability of neurons and interacting with GABA, a brain chemical that inhibits excessive activity – effectively compensating for weak neural connectivity in some participants.
In fact, the stimulation helped underperformers reach or even surpass the scores of peers with naturally stronger brain wiring. But those who already performed well saw no benefit.
“Some people struggle with things, and if we can help their brain to fulfil their potential, we open them a lot of opportunities that otherwise would be closed,” said Cohen Kadosh, calling it an “exciting time” for the field of brain stimulation research.
Still, he flagged a key ethical concern: the risk that such technologies could become more available to those with financial means, widening – rather than closing – access gaps.
He also urged the public not to try this at home. “Some people struggle with learning, and if our research proves successful beyond the lab, we could help them fulfil their ambitions and unlock opportunities that might otherwise remain out of reach.”