. PANAS: No effect four. STAI-state: No impact Active vs. sham tDCS: 1. Valence

Valence rating process with IAPS stimuli (t0.5)(C) EFFECTS OF NIBS ON ATTENTIONAL PROCESSING OF EMOTIONAL Facts rTMS research Vanderhasselt et al., 2011 Crossover Sham controlled 28 (0) 22.3 R DLPFC (MNI BN) ten Hz 40 trains of 3.9 s 26.1 s ITI 1560 pulses 110 MT 10 Hz 40 trains of three.9 s 26.1 s ITI 1560 pulses 110 MT 1. Exogenous Cipient cells, though altering gene expression and mediating functional properties (Valadi cueing job with neutral and angry faces (t0, t1) two. POMS-32 (t0, t1, t30) Active vs. sham rTMS: 1. Exogenous cueing task: Increased AB for angry faces two. POMS-32: No effectDe Raedt et al.,Crossover (n = 18) and parallel (n = 19) sham controlled37 (0)22.L DLPFC R DLPFC (MNI BN)1. Exogenous cueing activity with neutral and angry faces throughout an fMRI scanning (t0, t30) two. Mood 5-item VAS: sadness, tension, vigor, fatigue, anger (t0, t1, t40)Active R DLPFC vs. sham rTMS: 1. Exogenous cueing activity and fMRI: Bigger disengagement score for angry faces connected with decreased activation in R DLPFC, dorsal ACC, and L SPG 2. Mood VAS: No effect Active L DLPFC vs. sham rTMS: 1. Reduce engagement score for angry faces related to improved activation inside the L OFC, R DLPFC, dorsal/pregenual ACC, R SPG 2. Mood VAS: No effect Active R DLPFC vs. sham rTMS: 1. NAP process: Decreased scores for negative faces 2. Mood VAS: No effect (Continued)Leyman et al.,Crossover Sham controlled18 (0)21.R DLPFC10 Hz 40 trains of 3.9 s 26.1 s ITI 1560 pulses 110 MT1. NAP activity with pleased, sad and neutral faces (t0, t1) two. Mood 5-item VAS: sadness, tension, vigor, fatigue, anger (t0, t1, t40)Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience | www.frontiersin.orgOctober 2015 | Volume 9 | title= fpsyg.2017.00007 ArticleMondino et al.NIBS effects on mood and emotionTABLE 1 | Continued References Study design N (Males) Imply age in years 24 Web-site of stimulation* L DLPFC (MNI BN) NIBS parameters** Experimental outcomes (Time of assessment) 1. NAP job with pleased, sad and neutral faces (t0, t1) two. Mood 5-item VAS: sadness, tension, vigor, fatigue, anger (t0, t1, t40) 1. Emotional Stroop job with masked and unmasked neutral and fearful faces (t30) Principal resultsCrossover Sham controlled22 (0)ten Hz 40 trains of three.9 s 26.1 s ITI 1560 pulses 110 MT 1 Hz 1 single train 1200 pulses 130 MT 0.6 Hz 1 single train 540 pulses 130 MTActive L DLPFC vs. sham rTMS: 1. NAP activity: No effect 2. Mood VAS: No effectVan Honk et al., 2002bCrossover Sham controlled8 (four)Variety: 20?R DLPFC (10/20 EEG)Active vs. sham rTMS: 1. Emotional Stroop process: Decreased interest for unmasked fearful faces Active rTMS, R vs. L DLPFC: 1. Emotional Stroop process: Elevated consideration for angry faces 2. PEP: Lowered PEP Correlation in between improved interest and lowered PEP Active rTMS, L vs. R DLPFC: 1. Emotional Stroop job: Decreased consideration for angry faces two. POMS-32: No impact Active rTMS, R vs. L DLPFC 1. Emotional Stroop process: Enhanced attention for angry faces 2.. PANAS: No impact four. STAI-state: No effect Active vs. sham tDCS: 1. Valence rating job: No effectPe -G ez et al.,Crossover Sham controlled16 (0)22.L DLPFC/M2 (10/20 EEG)1 mA 20 min 35 cm1.