BackgroundInhibitory control, or the ability to suppress planned but inappropriate prepotent actions in the current environment, plays an important role in the control of human performance. Evidence from empirical studies utilizing a sport-specific design has shown that athletes have superior inhibitory control. However, less is known about whether this superiority might (1) still be seen in a general cognitive task without a sport-related context; (2) be modulated differentially by different sporting expertise (e.g., tennis versus swimming).Methodology/Principal FindingsHere we compared inhibitory control across tennis players, swimmers and sedentary non-athletic controls using a stop-signal task without a sport-specific design. Our primary finding showed that tennis players had shorter stop-signal reaction times (SSRTs) when compared to swimmers and sedentary controls, whereas no difference was found between swimmers and sedentary controls. Importantly, this effect was further confirmed after considering potential confounding factors (e.g., BMI, training experience, estimated levels of physical activity and VO2max), indicative of better ability to inhibit unrequired responses in tennis players.Conclusions/SignificanceThis suggests that fundamental inhibitory control in athletes can benefit from open skill training. Sport with both physical and cognitive demands may provide a potential clinical intervention for those who have difficulties in inhibitory control.

Theta-burst transcranial magnetic stimulation could modulate cortical excitability and has the potential to treat refractory depression. However, there has been a lack of large randomized studies of the antidepressant efficacy of different forms of theta-burst stimulation, such as intermittent and continuous theta-burst stimulation. A randomized sham-controlled study was conducted to investigate antidepressant efficacy of theta-burst stimulation and to compare efficacy among left-prefrontal intermittent theta-burst stimulation, right-prefrontal continuous theta-burst stimulation and a combination of them in patients showing different levels of antidepressant refractoriness. A group of 60 treatment-refractory patients with recurrent major depressive disorder were recruited and randomized to four groups (Group A: continuous theta-burst stimulation; Group B: intermittent theta-burst stimulation; Group C: a combination of continuous and intermittent theta-burst stimulation; and Group D: sham theta-burst stimulation; 15 patients were included in each group). After 2 weeks of theta-burst stimulation treatment, depression improved in all groups. Groups B and C had better antidepressant responses (as reflected by % decreases in depression score) than Groups A and D (P = 0.001, post hoc analysis: B > A, B > D, C > A, and C > D), even after controlling for age and refractoriness scores. The mean antidepressant effect was highest in Group C and followed by that in Group B. Additionally, a significant placebo effect was found in patients with low refractoriness; this disappeared in patients with moderate-to-high refractoriness. A significant correlation existed between refractoriness scores and treatment responses. Treatment refractoriness was a significant factor negatively predicting efficacy of theta-burst stimulation (P = 0.039). This randomized sham-controlled study demonstrated that active theta-burst stimulation is a well-tolerated form of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and has good antidepressant efficacy, particularly in depressed subjects within a certain range of treatment refractoriness.

The limits of human visual short-term memory (VSTM) have been well documented, and recent neuroscientific studies suggest that VSTM performance is associated with activity in the posterior parietal cortex. Here we show that artificially elevating parietal activity via positively charged electric current through the skull can rapidly and effortlessly improve people's VSTM performance. This artificial improvement, however, comes with an interesting twist: it interacts with people's natural VSTM capability such that low performers who tend to remember less information benefitted from the stimulation, whereas high performers did not. This behavioral dichotomy is explained by event-related potentials around the parietal regions: low performers showed increased waveforms in N2pc and contralateral delay activity (CDA), which implies improvement in attention deployment and memory access in the current paradigm, respectively. Interestingly, these components are found during the presentation of the test array instead of the retention interval, from the parietal sites ipsilateral to the target location, thus suggesting that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was mainly improving one's ability to suppress no-change distractors located on the irrelevant side of the display during the comparison stage. The high performers, however, did not benefit from tDCS as they showed equally large waveforms in N2pc and CDA, or SPCN (sustained parietal contralateral negativity), before and after the stimulation such that electrical stimulation could not help any further, which also accurately accounts for our behavioral observations. Together, these results suggest that there is indeed a fixed upper limit in VSTM, but the low performers can benefit from neurostimulation to reach that maximum via enhanced comparison processes, and such behavioral improvement can be directly quantified and visualized by the magnitude of its associated electrophysiological waveforms.

The goal of this experiment was to determine whether the allocation of attention necessarily requires saccade preparation. To dissociate the focus of attention from the endpoint of a saccade, macaque monkeys were trained to perform visual search for a uniquely colored rectangle and shift gaze either toward or opposite this color singleton according to its orientation. A vertical singleton cued a prosaccade, a horizontal singleton, an antisaccade. Saccade preparation was probed by measuring the direction of saccades evoked by intracortical microstimulation of the frontal eye fields at variable times after presentation of the search array. Eye movements evoked on prosaccade trials deviated progressively toward the singleton that was also the endpoint of the correct eye movement. However, eye movements evoked on antisaccade trials never deviated toward the singleton but only progressively toward the location opposite the singleton. This occurred even though previous work showed that on antisaccade trials most neurons in frontal eye fields initially select the singleton while attention is allocated to distinguish its shape. Thus, sensorimotor structures can covertly orient attention without preparing a saccade.frontal eye fields ͉ microstimulation ͉ target selection H umans can orient to an interesting object or region of the visual scene covertly by allocating attention and overtly by executing an eye movement. A longstanding issue has been whether the shift of attention and the shift of gaze are independent (1). The premotor theory of attention (2, 3) posits that the allocation of spatial attention is equivalent to planning but not executing a saccade. Evidence for this theory includes the coupling of spatial attention and saccade preparation (4-6), observations that neurons in sensorimotor structures such as frontal eye fields (FEF) are modulated when attention is allocated (7-11), that the trajectories of saccades can be influenced by the allocation of attention (12), and that electrical stimulation of FEF and superior colliculus can influence the allocation of attention (13,14).However, other evidence suggests a functional distinction between covert and overt orienting (15). It is possible to shift attention without shifting gaze (5, 6). Also, the selective activity of visually responsive neurons in sensorimotor structures corresponds to the allocation of attention distinct from saccade preparation (16)(17)(18)(19). In particular, neurons in FEF select the location of a salient object in an array when monkeys maintain fixation or shift gaze away from that object (7,(20)(21)(22)(23). Furthermore, in a stop signal task, visual neurons in FEF and superior colliculus do not produce signals sufficient to contribute to the control of saccade generation (24,25).The properties of neurons in the FEF of monkeys performing visual search requiring explicit stimulus-response mapping based on the shape of a color singleton provide an opportunity to investigate whether orienting to a visual stimulus necessarily requires prepa...

The field of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) has experienced significant growth in the past 15 years. One of the tES techniques leading this increased interest is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Significant research efforts have been devoted to determining the clinical potential of tDCS in humans. Despite the promising results obtained with tDCS in basic and clinical neuroscience, further progress has been impeded by a lack of clarity on international regulatory pathways. We therefore convened a group of research and clinician experts on tDCS to review the research and clinical use of tDCS. In this report, we review the regulatory status of tDCS, and we summarize the results according to research, off-label and compassionate use of tDCS in the following countries: Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, India, Iran, Italy, Portugal, South Korea, Taiwan and United States. Research use, off label treatment and compassionate use of tDCS are employed in most of the countries reviewed in this study. It is critical that a global or local effort is organized to pursue definite evidence to either approve and regulate or restrict the use of tDCS in clinical practice on the basis of adequate randomized controlled treatment trials.