Review of Buch et al., 2011A fundamental principle of neuronal plasticity is that synchronous or asynchronous activity in neurons can lead, respectively, to strengthening or weakening of shared synapses (Hebb, 1949). Buch et al. (2011) asked whether paired associative stimulation (PAS) of interconnected areas of the cortex via noninvasive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) might selectively induce Hebbian-like plasticity in a specific anatomical pathway in humans.As introduced by Stefan and colleagues (2000), PAS is a plasticity-inducing protocol that pairs electrical stimulation of a median nerve with a TMS pulse over primary motor cortex (M1). The time interval between stimuli is crucial for induction of either potentiation-or depression-like plasticity effects. The polarity of the effect is dependent on whether the input to the cortex from the median nerve stimulation precedes, coincides with, or follows the TMS-induced motor output. The motor output is measured as the motor-evoked potential (MEP).Subsequently, Rizzo and colleagues (2009) developed the idea of PAS between cortical regions. They demonstrated that it is possible to induce lasting changes in paired-pulse interhemispheric motor inhibition and single-pulse-induced M1-MEP size in humans by using a modified PAS protocol that used two consecutive TMS pulses between left and right M1. To address whether such plasticity between interconnected cortical areas can be pathwayspecific, Buch et al. (2011) used an established paired-pulse protocol (with an interstimulus interval of 8 ms) for probing physiological connectivity between ventral premotor cortex (PMv) and M1. A first conditioning TMS pulse is applied over PMv followed by a second test TMS pulse over M1. The effect is measured and quantified as the change between the MEP produced by the test pulse alone and the MEP produced when the test pulse is influenced by the conditioning pulse. They then sought to induce plastic change in this connection by repetitively delivering 90 pairs of pulses (one pair every 10 s) with the same interstimulus interval (ISI) and the same coil positions. Buch et al. (2011) found that stimulating PMv and M1 with an ISI of 8 ms significantly potentiated the inhibitory effect in the PMv-M1 paired-pulse paradigm, as the test-MEP size was reduced significantly. The effects of the PAS on functional connectivity were present for up to 1 h after intervention and reverted back to baseline at 3 h.To demonstrate the pathway specificity of this plasticity, the authors used a second stimulation site, the pre-supplementary area (pre-SMA), which was targeted by moving 4 cm anteriortothevertex.Inbothconditions,PMv and pre-SMA PAS, 110% M1 resting motor threshold (rMT) was used as the stimulation intensity. The results support an anatomical pathway specificity of the plasticity-inducing protocol: paired stimulation over the pre-SMA was not effective, i.e., it did not change PMv-M1 connectivity, whereas PMv stimulation induced lasting effects.As a control experiment for the timing co...