Response to Ruby et al: On a ‘failed’ attempt to manipulate conscious perception with transcranial magnetic stimulation to prefrontal cortex

Does disruption of prefrontal cortical activity using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) impair visual metacognition? An initial study supporting this idea (Rounis, Maniscalco, Rothwell, Passingham, & Lau, 2010) motivated an attempted replication and extension (Bor, Schwartzman, Barrett, & Seth, 2017). Bor et al. failed to replicate the initial study, concluding that there was not good evidence that TMS to prefrontal cortex impairs visual metacognition. This failed replication has recently been critiqued by some of the authors of the initial study (Ruby, Maniscalco, Lau, & Peters, 2017). Here, we argue that these recent criticisms are misplaced. In responding to the criticisms of Ruby et al, we encounter some more general issues concerning good practice in replication of cognitive neuroscience studies, and in setting criteria for excluding data when employing statistical analyses like signal detection theory. We look forward to further studies of the role of prefrontal cortex in metacognition, with increasingly refined methodologies, motivated by the discussions in this series of papers.

利用经颅磁刺激（TMS）中断额叶皮层活动是否会影响视觉元认知？这一假设最初由Rounis等人在2010年的研究中提出，并引发了后续的尝试性复制与拓展研究（Bor等，2017）。然而，Bor等人未能复制最初的研究结果，并得出结论，没有充分的证据表明对额叶皮层的TMS会损害视觉元认知。这一复制失败的结论近期遭到了最初研究部分作者（Ruby等，2017）的批评。在本研究中，我们认为这些最新的批评意见并不恰当。在回应Ruby等人的批评时，我们遇到了关于认知神经科学研究中良好实践的一些更普遍问题，以及在使用信号检测理论等统计方法时设定排除数据标准的问题。我们期待着未来对额叶皮层在元认知中作用的研究，这些研究将以这一系列论文中的讨论为契机，采用日益精良的方法论。