2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107792
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High-definition transcranial direct current stimulation of the lateral occipital cortex influences figure-ground perception

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The current density is often set as 1.4 mA cm −2 (the current is 2 mA) for most HD-tDCS studies [ 52 , 53 , 54 ]. Therefore, the constant current anodal polarization tests were performed at 1.43 mA cm −2 , and the plots of electrode potential versus time were also recorded during the first cycle of charging ( Figure 9 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current density is often set as 1.4 mA cm −2 (the current is 2 mA) for most HD-tDCS studies [ 52 , 53 , 54 ]. Therefore, the constant current anodal polarization tests were performed at 1.43 mA cm −2 , and the plots of electrode potential versus time were also recorded during the first cycle of charging ( Figure 9 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, it will be important to replicate our findings and conduct more research on the role of the LOC in alcohol use, given that this area could be a potentially good target for neuromodulation techniques designed to change VTA-cortical circuits. Indeed, neuromodulation techniques have shown promise in targeting the occipital cortex [55][56][57][58][59] and treating maladaptive alcohol and substance use [60,61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While it might become clear to participants over time that the displays contained a portion of a familiar object, simply looking for the object named by the label would not be a conducive strategy because (1) the labels were not predictive (50% valid, 50% invalid), (2) participants did not know which portion of an object would be depicted or how that portion would be posed, and (3) the label did not give any location information relevant to the left/right response. Furthermore, previous research has shown that object identification is neither necessary nor sufficient for detecting an object on the familiar configuration side of the border in these displays [ 39 , 40 ]. Therefore, the detection responses indexed via figure assignment are not confounded by identification.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Peterson and Gibson ([ 34 , 35 , 36 ]) previously showed that figures/objects were more likely to be detected on the critical side of the border when bipartite displays were presented such that the object was sketched in its typical upright orientation rather than an inverted orientation (cf. [ 11 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]). With the 180° orientation change from upright to inverted, the object configuration changed from typical to atypical whereas the features did not change (e.g., convexities into or out of the critical regions and the degree to which borders are curved versus straight remain constant).…”
Section: The Present Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation