ArticleBrain stimulation
Intracortical microstimulation of human somatosensory cortex induces natural perceptual biases.
Article in Brain stimulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term safety and efficacy of intracortical microstimulation in humans.Science translational medicine · 2026Trial
- Biomimetic stimulation patterns drive natural artificial touch percepts using intracortical microstimulation in humans.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Trial
- Integration of learned artificial sensation with vision during freely moving navigation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Patterned wireless transcranial optogenetics generates artificial perception.Nature neuroscience · 2026Article
- Expectation Of Tactile Signals In Human Motor Cortex.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Evoking stable and precise tactile sensations via multi-electrode intracortical microstimulation of the somatosensory cortex.Nature biomedical engineering · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Time-order error, a psychophysical phenomenon in which the duration in between successive stimuli alters perception, has been studied for decades by neuroscientists and psychologists. To date, however, the locus of these effects is unknown. We use intracortical microstimulation of somatosensory cortex in three humans with spinal cord injury as a tool to bypass initial stages of processing and restrict the possible locations that signals could be modified. Using a 2-interval forced choice amplitude discrimination paradigm, we first assessed the extent to which order effects are observed. Comparing trials where the standard stimulus was in the first or second interval, we found that systematic biases are exhibited, typically causing the intensity of the second stimulus to be overestimated The degree of this overestimation for individual electrodes was dependent on the perceptual sensitivity to changes in stimulus amplitude. To investigate the role of memory on this phenomenon, we implemented a 2-interval magnitude estimation task in which participants were instructed to ignore the first stimulus and again found that the perceptual intensity of the second stimulus tended to be enhanced by the first in a manner that depended on the amplitude and duration of the first stimulus. Finally, we repeated both paradigms while varying the inter-stimulus interval to examine the timescale over which these effects occur and found that longer inter-stimulus intervals reduced the effect size. These results show that direct activation of primary somatosensory cortex is sufficient to induce time-order errors.
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.