OBJECTIVE: The allocation of attention to sensory stimulation and movement might influence cortical activity. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of variation of intensity of attention (Experiment 1) and direction of attention (Experiment 2) on cortical excitability and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) during performance of a simple index finger abduction task. METHODS: Subjects responded to subtle cutaneous electrical stimulation delivered to the index finger while single and paired TMS pulses were delivered during muscle relaxation between successive responses. In Experiment 1, attentional resources allocated to the task were manipulated using a dual task paradigm involving a backward-counting task. In Experiment 2, spatial attention was varied by delivering cutaneous stimuli to the responding or the non-responding index finger. RESULTS: In Experiment 1, SICI was reduced during performance, but was unaffected by variation in the intensity of attention. The results of Experiment 2, however, showed that SICI was significantly lower when attention was directed to the responding hand compared with when it was directed to the non-responding hand. CONCLUSIONS: While SICI was not affected by variation of attentional resources, it was influenced by spatial attention. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings may be relevant in future investigations of the underlying neurophysiology of plasticity.
OBJECTIVE: The allocation of attention to sensory stimulation and movement might influence cortical activity. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of variation of intensity of attention (Experiment 1) and direction of attention (Experiment 2) on cortical excitability and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) during performance of a simple index finger abduction task. METHODS: Subjects responded to subtle cutaneous electrical stimulation delivered to the index finger while single and paired TMS pulses were delivered during muscle relaxation between successive responses. In Experiment 1, attentional resources allocated to the task were manipulated using a dual task paradigm involving a backward-counting task. In Experiment 2, spatial attention was varied by delivering cutaneous stimuli to the responding or the non-responding index finger. RESULTS: In Experiment 1, SICI was reduced during performance, but was unaffected by variation in the intensity of attention. The results of Experiment 2, however, showed that SICI was significantly lower when attention was directed to the responding hand compared with when it was directed to the non-responding hand. CONCLUSIONS: While SICI was not affected by variation of attentional resources, it was influenced by spatial attention. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings may be relevant in future investigations of the underlying neurophysiology of plasticity.
Authors: Cathérine C S Delnooz; Jaco W Pasman; Christian F Beckmann; Bart P C van de Warrenburg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Christoph Berger; Juliane Müller-Godeffroy; Ivo Marx; Olaf Reis; Johannes Buchmann; Alexander Dück Journal: Brain Behav Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 2.708
Authors: Ryan J Marker; Jennifer L Stephenson; Benzi M Kluger; Douglas Curran-Everett; Katrina S Maluf Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 4.620