Stimulation success!? Improved response inhibition performance after prefrontal single-site and condition-and-perturb transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Overview

1. Psychology of Conflict Risk and Safety, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
2. Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig, Germany
3. University College Dublin, Dublin, Irelands UK
4. Institut für Angewandte Informatik (INFAI), Leipzig, Germany
5. University College London, London, UK
6. University of Trier, Trier, Germany
7. Wilhelm Wundt Institute for Psychology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany

Abstract

In everyday behaviour, the ability to stop an already initiated action is critical for ensuring both your safety and that of others; for example, when stopping a reaching movement towards a hot stove-top after realising it is hot. Neuroscientific evidence points towards the critical role of several regions in the right prefrontal cortex in the coordination and execution of this response inhibition—specifically the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) and the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC). The present study investigated the effects of different transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) protocols on stop-signal task (SST) performance. We hypothesized that TMS over one or both of these areas would be detrimental to performance. However, contrary to our hypothesis, TMS significantly facilitated performance regardless of the stimulation condition. We applied both frequentist and Bayesian methods to assess the robustness of these effects, revealing consistent reductions in stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) across active conditions. Our results add to the growing body of results that suggest TMS effects may not be as straight-forward as usually assumed and that so-called “inhibitory protocols” can facilitate performance. This result could be explained by a shift in the signal-to-noise ratio depending on the pre-activation of the area. Put differently, TMS may have primed task-related activity in the target areas to a level that was optimal for task performance. Alternatively, the observed effect may reflect an (over)compensation by other parts of the network or disruption of competing resources. Future studies may provide further support for these hypotheses.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.

Data

Datasets cited

• osf:adnbq, at OSF; found in “Data availability”

Data availability

All data can be accessed at OSF via https://osf.io/adnbq/

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 30 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 6 authors, 5 keywords, 12 MeSH terms, 2 funders, 84 references.

Cite

This paper

Friehs, M. A., Ferrante, M., Jung, H., Dechant, M., Frings, C., & Hartwigsen, G. (2026). Stimulation success!? Improved response inhibition performance after prefrontal single-site and condition-and-perturb transcranial magnetic stimulation. Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 26(4), 1613-1629. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-026-01439-9

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1162/nol.a.244 [code]

A Novel Approach to Map the Causal Impact of Brain Stimulation on Semantic Processing With Language Models.

Journal: Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: other, 7 references, author Gesa Hartwigsen

[2] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1211 [code]

Effects of electric field direction on TMS-based motor cortex mapping.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: other, systems, 7 references

[3] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1292 [code]

Assessing adverse effects and unspecific effects of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS).

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: 1 reference, author Gesa Hartwigsen

[4] doi:10.1111/ejn.70528 [code]

Dorsal Posterior Parietal Cortex Lesions Disrupt Spatial- but Not Motor-Based Inhibition.

Journal: The European journal of neuroscience

In common: 4 references

[5] doi:10.3758/s13415-026-01428-y

Role of the inferior frontal gyrus and impulsivity in approach motivation: A low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study.

Journal: Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience

In common: other, 3 references

[6] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1225

Independent contributions of language activations in left and right temporal cortex to aphasia outcomes after stroke.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: 3 references

[7] doi:10.1002/gps3.70042 [code]

Effects of single-session transcranial direct current stimulation on response inhibition in stop-signal task performance: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Journal: General psychiatry

In common: other, 3 references

[8] doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003635 [code]

A cortico-subthalamic circuit rapidly engages and releases inhibition of specific movements depending on the environmental context.

Journal: PLoS biology

In common: systems, 3 references

[9] doi: [code]

Neural Correlates of Inhibitory Control in Impulsivity Traits in Non-Ecological Human–Computer Tasks: An ALE Meta-Analysis

Journal: Brain sciences

In common: 3 references

[10] doi:10.1038/s41386-026-02401-6 [code]

Model-based analysis of stop-signal data reveals robust neural and clinical correlates of evidence accumulation but not inhibition.

Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology

In common: 3 references

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.