Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

From Sensing to Sense-Making: A Framework for On-Person Intelligence with Wearable Biosensors and Edge LLMs.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Urgent, hurry up!!! Perceived time pressure affects fine motor performance via subjective distress in U.S. adults.

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same author

"Who are you going to call?:" Research ethics consultation directors' perspectives on barriers and facilitators.

Journal of clinical and translational science·2025
Same author

Inferring Mental States via Linear and Non-Linear Body Movement Dynamics: A Pilot Study.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2025
Same author

Psychological, physical, and cognitive factors that influence tactical performance during a military relevant virtual reality scenario.

Cognitive research: principles and implications·2025
Same author

Military applications of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for enhanced multitasking performance.

Cognitive research: principles and implications·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 20, 2026

Electrode Positioning and Montage in Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
12:00

Electrode Positioning and Montage in Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Published on: May 23, 2011

266.5K

Mitigating cutaneous sensation differences during tDCS: comparing sham versus low intensity control conditions.

Tad T Brunyé1, Julie Cantelon1, Amanda Holmes1

  • 1US. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center, RDNS-SEW-THC, 15 Kansas St., Natick, MA, USA; Tufts University, Department of Psychology, 490 Boston Ave., Medford, MA, USA.

Brain Stimulation
|December 3, 2014
PubMed
Summary

A low-intensity (0.5 mA) direct current brain stimulation control effectively reduces perceived sensations without altering cognitive task performance. This offers a potential alternative to traditional sham stimulation in research designs.

Keywords:
Brain stimulationCutaneous sensationInhibitory controlMethodology

More Related Videos

Non-Invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation Montages for Modulation of Human Motor Function
07:47

Non-Invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation Montages for Modulation of Human Motor Function

Published on: February 4, 2016

13.8K
Modulating Cognition Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Cerebellum
11:47

Modulating Cognition Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Cerebellum

Published on: February 15, 2015

30.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 20, 2026

Electrode Positioning and Montage in Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
12:00

Electrode Positioning and Montage in Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Published on: May 23, 2011

266.5K
Non-Invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation Montages for Modulation of Human Motor Function
07:47

Non-Invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation Montages for Modulation of Human Motor Function

Published on: February 4, 2016

13.8K
Modulating Cognition Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Cerebellum
11:47

Modulating Cognition Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Cerebellum

Published on: February 15, 2015

30.6K

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Science
  • Neuromodulation

Background:

  • Cutaneous sensations during brain stimulation can bias participant experience and performance.
  • Standard sham stimulation may not fully control for these sensory confounds.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate a low-intensity (0.5 mA) current as a substitute for sham transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).
  • To determine if this low-intensity control impacts subjective sensations and cognitive task performance.

Main Methods:

  • A high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) system targeted the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex.
  • Four conditions were tested in a within-subjects design: sham (2.0 mA and 0.5 mA) and active (2.0 mA and 0.5 mA).
  • Participants completed a cognitive interference task and rated sensations during stimulation.

Main Results:

  • The 0.5 mA control condition significantly reduced perceived sensation differences between active and sham stimulation.
  • Cognitive task performance remained comparable between the 2.0 mA and 0.5 mA active stimulation conditions.

Conclusions:

  • Low-intensity control stimulation may be a viable alternative to conventional sham tDCS in repeated-measures studies.
  • Further research is needed to explore limitations and optimize this methodological approach.