High‐definition transcranial direct current stimulation over right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex differentially modulates inhibitory mechanisms for speech vs. limb movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence suggests that planning and execution of speech and limb movement are subserved by common neural substrates. However, less is known about whether they are supported by a common inhibitory mechanism. P3 event-related potentials (ERPs) is a neural signature of motor inhibition, which are found to be generated by several brain regions including the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC). However, the relative contribution of rDLPFC to the P3 response associated with speech versus limb inhibition remains elusive. We investigated the contribution of rDLPFC to the P3 underlying speech versus limb movement inhibition. Twenty-one neurotypical adults received both cathodal and sham high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) over rDLPFC. ERPs were subsequently recorded while subjects were performing speech and limb Go/No-Go tasks. Cathodal HD-tDCS decreased accuracy for speech versus limb No-Go. Both speech and limb No-Go elicited a similar topographical distribution of P3, with significantly larger amplitudes for speech versus limb at a frontocentral location following cathodal HD-tDCS. Moreover, results showed stronger activation in cingulate cortex and rDLPFC for speech versus limb No-Go following cathodal HD-tDCS. These results indicate (1) P3 is an ERP marker of amodal inhibitory mechanisms that support both speech and limb inhibition, (2) larger P3 for speech versus limb No-Go following cathodal HD-tDCS may reflect the recruitment of additional neural resources-particularly within rDLPFC and cingulate cortex-as compensatory mechanisms to counteract the temporary stimulation-induced decline in speech inhibitory process. These findings have translational implications for neurological conditions that concurrently affect speech and limb movement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".