ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2013
Non-invasive brain stimulation can induce paradoxical facilitation. Are these neuroenhancements transferable and meaningful to security services?
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effects of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation of the Brain on Sleep: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Pooled it
- Frontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Induces Dopamine Release in the Ventral Striatum in Human.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2018Trial
- Effects of prefrontal rTMS on autonomic reactions to affective pictures.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2017Trial
- Tolerability of Repeated Application of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation with Limited Outputs to Healthy Subjects.Brain stimulationTrial
- Noninvasive brain stimulation and athletic performance: a critical narrative review.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Neural dissociation of attention and working memory through inhibitory control.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Modulation of Motor Awareness: A Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Study in the Healthy Brain.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Optimizing the Effect of tDCS on Motor Sequence Learning in the Elderly.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Non-invasive brain stimulation and neuroenhancement.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2022Review
- Improvement of Insight with Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Use in Warfighting: Benefits, Risks, and Future Prospects.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2019Review
- Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Primary Motor Cortex on Reaction Time and Tapping Performance: A Comparison Between Athletes and Non-athletes.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2019Article
- Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of cognitive impairment in frontotemporal dementia: an open-label pilot study.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2018Article
- Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for Auditory Hallucinations: A Systematic Review.Shanghai archives of psychiatry · 2016Article
- tDCS for Memory Enhancement: Analysis of the Speculative Aspects of Ethical Issues.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2016Article
- Neuroscience perspectives on security.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2014Article
- The role of expectations, hype and ethics in neuroimaging and neuromodulation futures.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2014Review
- Why non-invasive brain stimulation should not be used in military and security services.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2013Article
- Is it ethical and safe to use non-invasive brain stimulation as a cognitive and motor enhancer device for military services? A reply to Sehm and Ragert ().Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For ages, we have been looking for ways to enhance our physical and cognitive capacities in order to augment our security. One potential way to enhance our capacities may be to externally stimulate the brain. Methods of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), have been recently developed to modulate brain activity. Both techniques are relatively safe and can transiently modify motor and cognitive functions outlasting the stimulation period. The purpose of this paper is to review data suggesting that NIBS can enhance motor and cognitive performance in healthy volunteers. We frame these findings in the context of whether they may serve security purposes. Specifically, we review studies reporting that NIBS induces paradoxical facilitation in motor (precision, speed, strength, acceleration endurance, and execution of daily motor task) and cognitive functions (attention, impulsive behavior, risk-taking, working memory, planning, and deceptive capacities). Although transferability and meaningfulness of these NIBS-induced paradoxical facilitations into real-life situations are not clear yet, NIBS may contribute at improving training of motor and cognitive functions relevant for military, civil, and forensic security services. This is an enthusiastic perspective that also calls for fair and open debates on the ethics of using NIBS in healthy individuals to enhance normal functions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.