Non -invasive brain stimulation methods may involve either the application of magnetic pulses to the head (Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: TMS), or the passing of an electrical current through the head (Transcranial Electrical Stimulation; TES). These methods can modulate neural processing in a safe and temporary way. Non -invasive brain stimulation methods can be used in healthy human subjects to investigate human physiology, understand brain function, and infer causal links between brain and behaviour. These methods can also be used to ameliorate neurological and neuropsychological problems in humans, usually involving several sessions of repeated stimulation. As such, non -invasive brain stimulation techniques offer an exciting methodological approach that is wide -reaching across the fields of neuroscience , psychology, and physiology .
Despite the advent of non -invasive brain stimulation methods offering exciting techniques for studying brain function, recent years have seen challenges with regards to the replication of TMS and TES effects. Indeed, participants’ responses to TMS and TES have been found to be highly variable. There are a number of methodological and physiological reasons for such intra - and inter-participant variability, and information -sharing between neuroscientists and physiologists would be highly valuable to illuminate which physiological factors should be measured and controlled for in order to reduce the neurophysiological variability of the effects of TMS and TES. Addressing how to improve design of TMS and TES experiments and improve the robustness of results is even more important in the face of the open science movement born out of the replication crisis in psychology.
The scope of the Research Topic is human -based studies only. We would like contributors to address both positive and null findings relating to their use of TMS and TES, and the lessons learned from their endeavours. We would like to particularly welcome contributions from groups who have new or confirmed information on what works in TMS and TES, whilst we are also open to information on what does not work. The former could take the form of replications, partial or complete, meta - analyses or
opinion papers. We also particularly welcome manuscripts addressing variables that influence TMS and TES outcome measures, and manuscripts where authors have identified high intra - or inter-subject variability in TMS and TES outcome measures.
Non -invasive brain stimulation methods may involve either the application of magnetic pulses to the head (Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: TMS), or the passing of an electrical current through the head (Transcranial Electrical Stimulation; TES). These methods can modulate neural processing in a safe and temporary way. Non -invasive brain stimulation methods can be used in healthy human subjects to investigate human physiology, understand brain function, and infer causal links between brain and behaviour. These methods can also be used to ameliorate neurological and neuropsychological problems in humans, usually involving several sessions of repeated stimulation. As such, non -invasive brain stimulation techniques offer an exciting methodological approach that is wide -reaching across the fields of neuroscience , psychology, and physiology .
Despite the advent of non -invasive brain stimulation methods offering exciting techniques for studying brain function, recent years have seen challenges with regards to the replication of TMS and TES effects. Indeed, participants’ responses to TMS and TES have been found to be highly variable. There are a number of methodological and physiological reasons for such intra - and inter-participant variability, and information -sharing between neuroscientists and physiologists would be highly valuable to illuminate which physiological factors should be measured and controlled for in order to reduce the neurophysiological variability of the effects of TMS and TES. Addressing how to improve design of TMS and TES experiments and improve the robustness of results is even more important in the face of the open science movement born out of the replication crisis in psychology.
The scope of the Research Topic is human -based studies only. We would like contributors to address both positive and null findings relating to their use of TMS and TES, and the lessons learned from their endeavours. We would like to particularly welcome contributions from groups who have new or confirmed information on what works in TMS and TES, whilst we are also open to information on what does not work. The former could take the form of replications, partial or complete, meta - analyses or
opinion papers. We also particularly welcome manuscripts addressing variables that influence TMS and TES outcome measures, and manuscripts where authors have identified high intra - or inter-subject variability in TMS and TES outcome measures.
