Transcranial magnetic stimulation over the right temporoparietal junction influences the sense of agency in healthy humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The sense of agency is an important aspect of motor control. Impaired sense of agency has been linked to several medical conditions, including schizophrenia and functional neurological disorders. A complex brain network subserves the sense of agency, and the right temporoparietal junction is one of its main nodes. In this paper, we tested whether transcranial magnetic stimulation over the right temporoparietal junction elicited behavioural changes in the sense of agency. Methods: In experiment 1, 15 healthy participants performed a behavioural task during functional MRI, with the goal of localizing the area relevant for the sense of agency in the right temporoparietal junction. In the task, the movement of a cursor (controlled by the participants) was artificially manipulated, and the sense of agency was either diminished (turbulence) or enhanced (magic). In experiment 2, we applied transcranial magnetic stimulation in 20 healthy participants in a sham-controlled, crossover trial with excitatory, inhibitory or sham (vertex) stimulation. We measured the summary agency score, an indicator of the sense of agency (lower values correspond to diminished sense of agency). Results: Experiment 1 revealed a peak of activation during agency manipulation in the right temporoparietal junction (Montreal Neurological Institute coordinates x, y, z: 68, -26, 34). Experiment 2 showed that inhibition of the right temporoparietal junction significantly reduced the summary agency score in both turbulence (from -14.4 ± 11.4% to -22.5 ± 8.9%), and magic (from -0.7 ± 5.8% to -4.4 ± 4.4%). Limitations: We found no excitatory effects, possibly because of a ceiling effect (because healthy participants have a normal sense of agency) or noneffectiveness of the excitatory protocol. Conclusion: Our experiments showed that the network subserving the sense of agency was amenable to neuromodulation in healthy participants. This sets the ground for further research in patients with impaired sense of agency. Clinical trial identification: DRKS00012992 (German clinical trials registry).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".