Thut et al., 2011a Thut G.

Veniero D.

Romei V.

Miniussi C.

Schyns P.

Gross J. Rhythmic TMS causes local entrainment of natural oscillatory signatures.

Weisz et al., 2014 Weisz N.

Lüchinger C.

Thut G.

Müller N. Effects of individual alpha rTMS applied to the auditory cortex and its implications for the treatment of chronic tinnitus.

Thut et al., 2011a Thut G.

Veniero D.

Romei V.

Miniussi C.

Schyns P.

Gross J. Rhythmic TMS causes local entrainment of natural oscillatory signatures.

Romei et al., 2010 Romei V.

Gross J.

Thut G. On the role of prestimulus alpha rhythms over occipito-parietal areas in visual input regulation: correlation or causation?.

Glass, 2001 Glass L. Synchronization and rhythmic processes in physiology.

Thut et al., 2011a Thut G.

Veniero D.

Romei V.

Miniussi C.

Schyns P.

Gross J. Rhythmic TMS causes local entrainment of natural oscillatory signatures.

Rossi et al. (2009) Rossi S.

Hallett M.

Rossini P.M.

Pascual-Leone A. Safety of TMS Consensus Group

Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research.

On Days II and III, TMS was applied during task performance and during EEG recording. Participants were seated with their chin positioned in a chin rest, their eyes open, and their gaze centered on a continuously displayed fixation cross (white on a gray background). They listened to the auditory stimuli presented binaurally through air-conducting tubes with foam ear tips (70 dB SPL). They were asked to maintain central fixation and to minimize eye blinks and other movements during the recording blocks. Short biphasic TMS pulses were delivered over the left Intraparietal Sulcus (see Results Figure S1 , and below) under rhythmic-TMS or arrhythmic-TMS (control condition) depending on the recording day. The TMS coil was oriented perpendicular to the target region, to maximize effect strength (). For each trial and for both tasks, five TMS pulses were delivered during the silent retention period between the two melodies, the first TMS pulse occurring 150 ms after the end of the first melody (900 ms post stimulus onset). In the rhythmic condition TMS pulses were delivered at 5Hz (1 pulse every 200 ms, frequency of stimulation defined with MEG/EEG data of Day I, see Results ). In the arrhythmic condition, the TMS pulses were delivered randomly within five consecutive 200ms time windows (see Figure 4 A). Note that because of the constraints of the arrhythmic condition (5 pseudo-random pulses in 1 s) 11.67 ± 2.68% of the TMS trains had a rhythmic pattern with a frequency centered around 5Hz (4.80 ± 0.18 Hz). These more “rhythmic” trials were thus removed for each participant for subsequent behavioral and electrophysiological analyses. We registered the TMS coil (70mm figure-of-eight coil connected to a Magstim Rapid2 Stimulator) in all conditions to the native coordinates of the most prominent posterior theta-generators that were localized in the left Intraparietal Sulcus for all participants (obtained from MEG source imaging, see Results and Figure S1 ) via Brainsight (Rogue Research). Neuronavigation was based on the coordinates of the individual MEG source maps and individual structural MR scans (native space). TMS intensity was at 60% of machine output (seefor similar procedure andwith TMS intensity ranging from 58% to 66%). On each TMS session there were two blocks of each of the two tasks. In each block, 108 five-pulse TMS trains were delivered, leading to 540 pulses per block over a block duration of about 11 min. Each TMS/EEG session (Days II and III) thus contained a total of 2160 active TMS pulses. Two 5 min resting state recordings (not presented here) were performed before and after the two TMS conditions (rhythmic, arrhythmic). The duration of the experiment for Days II and III was around one hour of recording, plus one hour for mounting the 64 EEG electrodes. The frequency of the rhythmic TMS was fixed to 5Hz (based on MEG/EEG results), and therefore was not adjusted to each participant’s individual theta frequency. This stimulation parameter was chosen based on previous rhythmic TMS studies showing that individual frequency tuning may not be a strict requirement for entrainment (see). Notably, it has been shown that with increasing stimulus intensity, the relationship between the effective stimulation frequency and the preferred frequency tends to be reduced (). With such strong driving forces as TMS, entrainment may be enabled using a relatively large frequency range (see), and therefore it may not be required to set the TMS rate to each participant’s individual self-generated frequency to observe behavioral effects. The TMS protocol respected the safety recommendations regarding stimulation parameters (intensity, number of pulses, ethic requirements) presented in