Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026
Temporal Pattern-Dependent Cerebellar Involvement in Conflict Processing: An Online Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abualait Turki, Bashir Shahid
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The cerebellum is increasingly recognized as a key contributor to cognitive control through interactions with distributed cerebello-cortical networks. Although online transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has demonstrated a causal role for the cerebellum in executive functions, it remains unknown whether conflict processing depends on brief, discrete cerebellar computations or on sustained processing across extended temporal windows.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether temporally extended cerebellar stimulation (triple pulses at 20 Hz) produces greater disruption of conflict processing than single-pulse when applied online during the Eriksen flanker task.
METHODS: Forty-two healthy participants performed the Eriksen flanker task while receiving online TMS over the cerebellum and vertex control site. Three Pulse Patterns were tested: triple-pulse (20 Hz), single-pulse, and no-TMS baseline. Single pulses were delivered at 150 ms post-stimulus; triple pulses were delivered at 20 Hz starting at the same latency. Reaction times (RT) and interference scores were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVAs and paired-samples t-tests. A difference-in-differences approach quantified the incremental effect of triple-pulse over single-pulse at each site.
RESULTS: The flanker task induced response conflict, with incongruent trials significantly slower than congruent trials. Cerebellar triple-pulse stimulation significantly increased RTs compared to cerebellar no-TMS, whereas cerebellar single-pulse showed smaller effects. Vertex stimulation produced no significant effects. Interference scores showed an incremental pattern for cerebellar stimulation while vertex interference scores remained stable.
CONCLUSION: Temporally extended cerebellar stimulation was associated with greater disruption of conflict processing than single-pulse stimulation in planned contrasts, a pattern consistent with the possibility that cerebellar contributions to cognitive control extend across a temporal window rather than being confined to a single discrete moment. Because the triple-pulse and single-pulse conditions differed in total pulse number, stimulation dose, and onset latency, this behavioral finding should be interpreted as consistent with, rather than proof of, sustained cerebellar processing.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether temporally extended cerebellar stimulation (triple pulses at 20 Hz) produces greater disruption of conflict processing than single-pulse when applied online during the Eriksen flanker task.
METHODS: Forty-two healthy participants performed the Eriksen flanker task while receiving online TMS over the cerebellum and vertex control site. Three Pulse Patterns were tested: triple-pulse (20 Hz), single-pulse, and no-TMS baseline. Single pulses were delivered at 150 ms post-stimulus; triple pulses were delivered at 20 Hz starting at the same latency. Reaction times (RT) and interference scores were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVAs and paired-samples t-tests. A difference-in-differences approach quantified the incremental effect of triple-pulse over single-pulse at each site.
RESULTS: The flanker task induced response conflict, with incongruent trials significantly slower than congruent trials. Cerebellar triple-pulse stimulation significantly increased RTs compared to cerebellar no-TMS, whereas cerebellar single-pulse showed smaller effects. Vertex stimulation produced no significant effects. Interference scores showed an incremental pattern for cerebellar stimulation while vertex interference scores remained stable.
CONCLUSION: Temporally extended cerebellar stimulation was associated with greater disruption of conflict processing than single-pulse stimulation in planned contrasts, a pattern consistent with the possibility that cerebellar contributions to cognitive control extend across a temporal window rather than being confined to a single discrete moment. Because the triple-pulse and single-pulse conditions differed in total pulse number, stimulation dose, and onset latency, this behavioral finding should be interpreted as consistent with, rather than proof of, sustained cerebellar processing.