2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2008.07.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

EEG and neuronavigated single-pulse TMS in the study of the observation/execution matching system: Are both techniques measuring the same process?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
68
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
(89 reference statements)
10
68
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This study is the only the second to directly compare EEG mu suppression and TMS interpersonal motor resonance concurrently, and the current sample (n=30) is significantly larger than that of the previous study (n=16; Lepage et al, 2008). In contrast to Lepage and colleagues, we found a significant relationship of moderate strength between our EEG and TMS measures of the mirror system.…”
Section: Correlations Between Mirror System Measures Social Cognitiocontrasting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This study is the only the second to directly compare EEG mu suppression and TMS interpersonal motor resonance concurrently, and the current sample (n=30) is significantly larger than that of the previous study (n=16; Lepage et al, 2008). In contrast to Lepage and colleagues, we found a significant relationship of moderate strength between our EEG and TMS measures of the mirror system.…”
Section: Correlations Between Mirror System Measures Social Cognitiocontrasting
confidence: 78%
“…While EEG and TMS are both commonly used to measure putative mirror system activity, there is limited information about the comparability of these techniques. One study used simultaneous EEG and TMS in healthy participants and found mu suppression and higher motor resonance in response to observed action, imagination and execution of movements compared to rest; however, the mu suppression and motor resonance variables did not correlate (Lepage et al, 2008). The authors suggested that motor resonance and mu suppression may therefore represent different aspects of the mirror system, and should not be used interchangeably.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increase of corticospinal output induced by tACS at ␤ range is consistent among subjects, and it seems to be potent enough to overcome the poor relationships between amplitude/ phase of oscillatory 20 Hz spontaneous activity of rolandic neurons and the size of motor responses evoked by TMS of the motor cortex (Zarkowski et al, 2006;Mitchell et al, 2007;Lepage et al, 2008;Sauseng et al, 2009). A likely explanation is that spontaneous oscillations and MEPs size reflect the excitability of the human motor system in overlapping, but not identical, neuronal populations (Mäki and Ilmoniemi, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Several studies have explored the possibility of inducing frequency specific effects by rhythmic TMS to modify cognition (Klimesch et al 2003) and motor output measures (Brignani et al 2008), showing that brain rhythms are causally implicated in shaping behavior. Others have used single-pulse TMS to define the relationship between the oscillatory state of the cortex and the response to a subsequent TMS pulse Lepage et al 2008;Romei et al 2008a, b;Sauseng et al 2008). Thus, EEG can be used to study how TMS interacts with rhythmic brain activity, and vice versa, as well as how rhythmic brain stimulation can be used to modify brain functions.…”
Section: How Tms-eeg Integration Can Be Usedmentioning
confidence: 99%