2022
DOI: 10.1111/ejn.15740
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rhythms in cognition: The evidence revisited

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
41
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 199 publications
1
41
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast to our initial hypothesis based on these findings, we did not find any significant accuracy modulation after button press in our pooled data. This result adds to other recent reports of inconclusive and null findings (Morrow and Samaha, 2021; van der Werf et al, 2021; Vigué-Guix et al, 2020) and it is in line with the general revision happening in the field (Keitel et al, 2022). However, this result does not question the validity of the studies implementing similar paradigms (Benedetto et al, 2016; Nakayama and Motoyoshi, 2019; Zhang et al, 2019), because of differences in the task design.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…In contrast to our initial hypothesis based on these findings, we did not find any significant accuracy modulation after button press in our pooled data. This result adds to other recent reports of inconclusive and null findings (Morrow and Samaha, 2021; van der Werf et al, 2021; Vigué-Guix et al, 2020) and it is in line with the general revision happening in the field (Keitel et al, 2022). However, this result does not question the validity of the studies implementing similar paradigms (Benedetto et al, 2016; Nakayama and Motoyoshi, 2019; Zhang et al, 2019), because of differences in the task design.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Our results of the increased contralateral synchronisation within the FPN replicate the work of Sauseng et al (2005) and validate our methodology and analysis pipeline (e.g., time-frequency analysis, synchronisation metric), setting the ground for the intended proof of concept test regarding transference to BCI. However, lateralised fronto-parietal connectivity patterns in attentional and perceptual disposition remain challenged in the literature together with the role of α power/phase (Ruzzoli, Torralba et al 2019; van Diepen et al 2019; Antonov et al 2020; Keitel et al, 2022). Lobier et al (2018) found that α-synchronisation was associated with visuospatial attention but revealed distinct lateralisation patterns regarding the visual system and top-down attentional networks.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our results of the increased contralateral synchronisation within the FPN replicate the work of Sauseng et al (2005) and validate our methodology and analysis pipeline (e.g., time-frequency analysis, synchronisation metric), setting the ground for the intended proof of concept test regarding transference to BCI. However, lateralised fronto-parietal connectivity patterns in attentional and perceptual disposition remain challenged in the literature together with the role of ⍺ power/phase (Ruzzoli, Torralba et al 2019;van Diepen et al 2019;Antonov et al 2020;Keitel et al, 2022). Lobier et al (2018) found that ⍺-synchronisation was associated with visuospatial attention but revealed distinct lateralisation patterns regarding the visual system and top-down attentional networks.…”
Section: Fronto-parietal Network Synchronisation Characterises Visuos...mentioning
confidence: 99%