ArticleCognitive processing2026
Exploring the effects of cerebellar tDCS on mental rotation.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the prefrontal and posterior parietal cortex can enhance mental rotation (MR) performance, whereas little is known about cerebellar tDCS (ctDCS). This study aimed to evaluate effects of ctDCS on a MR task. Fifty-five healthy subjects were randomly assigned to active-ctDCS (1.5 mA; 20 min; n = 28) or sham-ctDCS (n = 27). Participants performed a MR task before (T0) and after (T1) stimulation. In each trial, two shapes appeared on a computer screen, one randomly rotated by 0, 45, 90, or 135 degrees. Subjects pressed the A or L key to indicate whether the shapes were identical or mirrored. A linear mixed model was run on the reaction times (RTs) recorded in each trial. Percent change in RTs (%RT) from T0 to T1 was also computed and analyzed using a second mixed-effects model with planned contrasts. A significant main effect of Time revealed RTs decreased from T0 (M = 3079.35, SE = 102.27) to T1 (M = 2565.36, SE = 102.27). No significant main effects or interactions involving Group were observed in either RT or %RT models. Planned contrasts revealed a single significant difference between groups in the 0° same condition, with the ctDCS group showing a greater reduction in %RT compared to the sham group. No other significant effects were found. ctDCS did not produce a global improvement in MR but showed selective effects under minimal spatial transformation demands. Further studies with different stimulation protocols are needed to clarify its role.
Identifiers
42530802What 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.