Rhythmic light stimulation elicits multiple, concurrent neural responses that separably shape human perception

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,738 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Rhythmic light stimulation offers solutions to innumerable cognitive and neurological disorders. However, like any neuromodulatory technique, responses to rhythmic light stimulation are highly variable, producing challenges in replicating lab-based studies and translating findings to the clinic. Across three MEG/EEG experiments, we show that this variability can, in part, be attributed to rhythmic light stimulation eliciting multiple, coexisting neural responses which have separable impacts on cognition. Specifically, we find that rhythmic light stimulation produces distinct neural responses at the fundamental (f) and second harmonic (2f) frequencies, and that these responses are differentially shaped by endogenous oscillatory dynamics that vary across participants. Importantly, these responses separably contribute to perception, with harmonic gamma-band responses supporting the representation of stimulus-specific information, and the phase of harmonic alpha-band responses causally contributing to near-threshold visual perception. We reproduce these effects across datasets, paradigms, and oscillatory bands, suggesting that the multiplex oscillatory responses elicited by rhythmic light stimulation are a robust and pervasive phenomenon. We propose that the complexity of neural responses to rhythmic stimulation can explain why there is substantial variability between studies using these techniques, and that understanding these complex responses may help advance neuromodulatory technologies for both fundamental and clinical neuroscience. Supplementary Material All supplementary material can be found at the end of this document. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00