Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 344

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How does transcranial magnetic stimulation modify neuronal activity in the brain? Implications for studies of cognition

Open access
Siebner, Hartwig R., Hartwigsen, Gesa, Kassuba, Tanja, Rothwell, John C.·2009·Cortex

Abstract

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) uses a magnetic field to “carry” a short lasting electrical current pulse into the brain where it stimulates neurones, particularly in superficial regions of cerebral cortex. TMS can interfere with cognitive functions in two ways. A high intensity TMS pulse causes a synchronised high frequency burst of discharge in a relatively large population of neurones that is terminated by a long lasting GABAergic inhibition. The combination of artificial synchronisation of activity followed by depression effectively disrupts perceptual, motor and cognitive processes in the human brain. This transient neurodisruption has been termed a “virtual lesion”. Smaller intensities of stimulation produce less activity; in such cases, cognitive operations can probably continue but are disrupted because of the added noisy input from the TNS pulse. It is usually argued that if a TMS pulse affects performance, then the area stimulated must provide an essential contribution to behaviour being studied. However, there is one exception to this: the pulse could be applied to an area that is not involved in the task but which has projections to the critical site. Activation of outputs from the site of stimulation could potentially disrupt processing at the distant site, interfering with behaviour without having any involvement in the task. A final important feature of the response to TMS is “context dependency”, which indicates that the response depends on how excitable the cortex is at the time the stimulus is applied: if many neurones are close to firing threshold then the more of them are recruited by the pulse than at rest. Many studies have noted this context-dependent modulation. However, it is often assumed that the excitability of an area has a simple relationship to activity in that area. We argue that this is not necessarily the case. Awareness of the problem may help resolve some apparent anomalies in the literature.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cortex.2009.02.007

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Cited by

See all 344

Metadata

Authors
Siebner, H. R., Hartwigsen, G., Kassuba, T., & Rothwell, J. C.
Venue
Cortex
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-10
Volume
45
Issue
9
Pages
1035-1042
ISSN
0010-9452 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114936102
Cited by
344
References
40
FWCI
12.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How does transcranial magnetic stimulation modify neuronal activity in the brain? Implications for studies of cognition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cortex.2009.02.007
The paper
Siebner, H. R., Hartwigsen, G., Kassuba, T., & Rothwell, J. C. (2009). How does transcranial magnetic stimulation modify neuronal activity in the brain? Implications for studies of cognition. Cortex. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2009.02.007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.