Cited by 195Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesMotor Control and Adaptation

A causal role of the right inferior frontal cortex in implementing strategies for multi-component behaviour

Open access
Dippel, Gabriel, Beste, Christian·2015·Nature Communications

Abstract

Everyday activities, such as, for example, driving a car or preparing a meal, require the hierarchical organization and processing of several individual actions. Currently, the neural mechanisms underlying the control of action sequences are not well understood. Here, the authors demonstrate that the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG) plays a key role in implementing the strategy used to cascade different actions. Continuous theta burst stimulation (TBS) applied to the rIFG results in a less efficient action cascading strategy, whereas intermittent TBS results in a more efficient strategy, compared with a shamTBS control condition. These effects are confirmed in electrophysiological data showing that activity differences in the rIFG are related to alterations in response selection processes. Overall, these results suggest that the neural dynamics of the rIFG determine the strategy used during some forms of everyday multi-component behaviour. Complex behaviours, such as driving a car, require the organization and processing of several individual actions. Here, the authors use transcranial magnetic stimulation to demonstrate that the right inferior frontal gyrus determines the strategy used to sequence actions during complex behaviours.

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 · 10.1038/ncomms7587

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dippel, G., & Beste, C.
Affiliations
Technische Universität Dresden (DE)
Corresponding author
Beste, Christian
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2015-04-08
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
6587-6587
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1992085281
Cited by
195
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 7
FWCI
16.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (BE4045/10-1 and 10-2, BE4045, DFG BE4045/10-1, BE 4045/10-1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
right inferior frontal gyrus, action sequencing, response selection, continuous theta burst stimulation, intermittent theta burst stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, complex behavior
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior, Brain Mapping, Electric Stimulation, Electroencephalography, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Task Performance and Analysis, Theta Rhythm, Prefrontal Cortex, Young Adult

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