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

Essential Tremor and Essential Tremor Plus Are Essentially Similar Electrophysiologically.

Movement disorders clinical practice·2024
Same author

Evaluating interhemispheric connectivity during midline object recognition using EEG.

PloS one·2022
Same author

Dual-hemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over primary motor cortex does not affect movement selection.

PloS one·2019
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 7, 2025

Updated Technique for Reliable, Easy, and Tolerated Transcranial Electrical Stimulation Including Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
10:11

Updated Technique for Reliable, Easy, and Tolerated Transcranial Electrical Stimulation Including Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Published on: January 3, 2020

11.0K

Behavioral Validation of Individualized Low-Intensity Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) Protocols.

Rajat Joshi1,2, Sainath Murali1,2, Nivethida Thirugnanasambandam3,2

  • 1National Brain Research Centre (NBRC), Manesar 122 052, India.

Eneuro
|December 22, 2023
PubMed
Summary

Individualizing transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) dose reduced electric field variability but did not significantly improve behavioral outcomes in motor learning or working memory tasks. Further research is needed to optimize tES protocols.

Keywords:
implicit motor learningindividualized dosetACStDCStranscranial electrical stimulation (tES)working memory

More Related Videos

Transcranial Electrical Brain Stimulation in Alert Rodents
10:08

Transcranial Electrical Brain Stimulation in Alert Rodents

Published on: November 2, 2017

10.7K
Randomized, Triple-Blind, and Parallel-Controlled Trial of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation after Stroke
08:54

Randomized, Triple-Blind, and Parallel-Controlled Trial of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation after Stroke

Published on: June 6, 2025

271

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 7, 2025

Updated Technique for Reliable, Easy, and Tolerated Transcranial Electrical Stimulation Including Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
10:11

Updated Technique for Reliable, Easy, and Tolerated Transcranial Electrical Stimulation Including Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Published on: January 3, 2020

11.0K
Transcranial Electrical Brain Stimulation in Alert Rodents
10:08

Transcranial Electrical Brain Stimulation in Alert Rodents

Published on: November 2, 2017

10.7K
Randomized, Triple-Blind, and Parallel-Controlled Trial of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation after Stroke
08:54

Randomized, Triple-Blind, and Parallel-Controlled Trial of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation after Stroke

Published on: June 6, 2025

271

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Neuromodulation
  • Cognitive Science

Background:

  • Interindividual variability in transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) effects limits clinical use.
  • Individualizing tES dose based on anatomy may reduce electric field (E-field) variability and improve outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To empirically evaluate the behavioral effects of individualized dose tES.
  • To compare individualized dose tES with fixed dose and sham tES.

Main Methods:

  • Single-blinded, sham-controlled, repeated-measures study with 42 healthy adults.
  • Examined transcranial direct current stimulation for motor learning and transcranial alternating current stimulation for working memory.
  • Participants received fixed dose, individualized dose, or sham tES during behavioral tasks.

Main Results:

  • Individualized dose tES successfully reduced E-field variability at targeted cortical surfaces.
  • No significant improvements in behavioral outcomes were observed for individualized dose tES compared to sham or fixed dose.

Conclusions:

  • While individualizing tES dose affects E-field distribution, it does not guarantee behavioral improvements.
  • The relationship between E-fields and behavior is complex, requiring further investigation into neuroanatomical and functional factors for tES protocol optimization.