6.
Greinacher R, Buhot L, Moller L, Learmonth G
. The time course of ineffective sham-blinding during low-intensity (1 mA) transcranial direct current stimulation. Eur J Neurosci. 2019; 50(8):3380-3388.
PMC: 6899874.
DOI: 10.1111/ejn.14497.
View
7.
Michael L, Kiefer M, Niedeggen M
. The influence of distracter and target features on distracter induced blindness. Adv Cogn Psychol. 2012; 8(1):62-9.
PMC: 3303155.
DOI: 10.2478/v10053-008-0103-3.
View
8.
Learmonth G, Thut G, Benwell C, Harvey M
. The implications of state-dependent tDCS effects in aging: Behavioural response is determined by baseline performance. Neuropsychologia. 2015; 74:108-19.
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.01.037.
View
9.
Chew T, Ho K, Loo C
. Inter- and Intra-individual Variability in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) at Varying Current Intensities. Brain Stimul. 2015; 8(6):1130-7.
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2015.07.031.
View
10.
Carvalho S, Boggio P, Goncalves O, Vigario A, Faria M, Silva S
. Transcranial direct current stimulation based metaplasticity protocols in working memory. Brain Stimul. 2015; 8(2):289-94.
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2014.11.011.
View
11.
Ebner C, Schroll H, Winther G, Niedeggen M, Hamker F
. Open and closed cortico-subcortical loops: A neuro-computational account of access to consciousness in the distractor-induced blindness paradigm. Conscious Cogn. 2015; 35:295-307.
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2015.02.007.
View
12.
Prehn K, Skoglund A, Strobach T
. Enhancement of task-switching performance with transcranial direct current stimulation over the right lateral prefrontal cortex. Exp Brain Res. 2021; 239(12):3447-3456.
PMC: 8599339.
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-021-06212-7.
View
13.
Jacobson L, Koslowsky M, Lavidor M
. tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: a meta-analytical review. Exp Brain Res. 2011; 216(1):1-10.
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-011-2891-9.
View
14.
Boggio P, Ferrucci R, Rigonatti S, Covre P, Nitsche M, Pascual-Leone A
. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory in patients with Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Sci. 2006; 249(1):31-8.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2006.05.062.
View
15.
Stankovic M, Zivanovic M, Bjekic J, Filipovic S
. Blinding in tDCS Studies: Correct End-of-Study Guess Does Not Moderate the Effects on Associative and Working Memory. Brain Sci. 2022; 12(1).
PMC: 8773753.
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12010058.
View
16.
Jones K, Berryhill M
. Parietal contributions to visual working memory depend on task difficulty. Front Psychiatry. 2012; 3:81.
PMC: 3437464.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00081.
View
17.
Antal A, Alekseichuk I, Bikson M, Brockmoller J, Brunoni A, Chen R
. Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol. 2017; 128(9):1774-1809.
PMC: 5985830.
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.06.001.
View
18.
Stagg C, Antal A, Nitsche M
. Physiology of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation. J ECT. 2018; 34(3):144-152.
DOI: 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000510.
View
19.
Niedeggen M, Busch N, Winther G
. The state of a central inhibition system predicts access to visual targets: An ERP study on distractor-induced blindness (DIB). Conscious Cogn. 2015; 35:308-18.
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2015.02.002.
View
20.
Hesselmann G, Niedeggen M, Sahraie A, Milders M
. Specifying the distractor inhibition account of attention-induced motion blindness. Vision Res. 2005; 46(6-7):1048-56.
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.10.007.
View