Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 336

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

DELAY IN THE EXECUTION OF VOLUNTARY MOVEMENT BY ELECTRICAL OR MAGNETIC BRAIN STIMULATION IN INTACT MAN: EVICENCE FOR THE STORAGE OF MOTOR PROGRAMS IN THE BRAIN

DAY, B. L., ROTHWELL, J. C., THOMPSON, P. D., DE NOORDHOUT, A. MAERTENS, NAKASHIMA, K., SHANNON, K., MARSDEN, C. D.·1989·Brain

Abstract

Experiments were undertaken to study the effect on voluntary movement of an electrical or magnetic stimulus delivered to the brain through the scalp. Subjects were trained to flex or extend their wrist rapidly in response to an auditory tone. A single brain stimulus (electrical or magnetic) delivered after the tone and before the usual time of onset of the voluntary reaction could delay the execution of the movement for up to 150 ms, without affecting the pattern of the agonist and antagonist EMG bursts. The delay increased with increasing stimulus intensity and with stimuli which were applied nearer to the usual time of onset of the voluntary reaction. A stimulus given after the onset of the first voluntary agonist EMG burst only delayed the onset of the first antagonist and later EMG bursts. Movement was not delayed when similar experiments were performed with supramaximal stimulation of the median nerve instead of the brain stimulus. The delay following a cortical shock was not due to spinal motoneurons being inaccessible to descending input during the delay period since a second brain stimulus, given in the middle of the delay period, was capable of producing a direct muscle response. Neither could the delay be explained by the brain stimulus altering the time of the subject's intention to respond since a stimulus delivered to one hemisphere before an attempted simultaneous bilateral wrist movement produced a far greater delay of the contralateral than the ipsilateral movement. We suggest that the brain stimulus delayed movement by inhibiting a group of strategically placed neurons in the brain (probably in the motor cortex) which made them unresponsive for a brief period to the command signals they receive which initiate the motor program of agonist and antagonist muscle activity. The results have implications for the issues of the storage of motor programs, internal monitoring of central movement commands and the site of organization of the antagonist EMG burst.

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 · 10.1093/brain/112.3.649

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 336

Metadata

Authors
DAY, B. L., ROTHWELL, J. C., THOMPSON, P. D., DE NOORDHOUT, A. M., NAKASHIMA, K., SHANNON, K., & MARSDEN, C. D.
Venue
Brain
Published
1989
Volume
112
Issue
3
Pages
649-663
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W1973214586
Cited by
336
References
0
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: DELAY IN THE EXECUTION OF VOLUNTARY MOVEMENT BY ELECTRICAL OR MAGNETIC BRAIN STIMULATION IN INTACT MAN: EVICENCE FOR THE STORAGE OF MOTOR PROGRAMS IN THE BRAIN. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/112.3.649
The paper
DAY, B. L., ROTHWELL, J. C., THOMPSON, P. D., DE NOORDHOUT, A. M., NAKASHIMA, K., SHANNON, K., & MARSDEN, C. D. (1989). DELAY IN THE EXECUTION OF VOLUNTARY MOVEMENT BY ELECTRICAL OR MAGNETIC BRAIN STIMULATION IN INTACT MAN: EVICENCE FOR THE STORAGE OF MOTOR PROGRAMS IN THE BRAIN. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/112.3.649

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.