Auditory cueing during NREM sleep elevates slow wave and spindle power relative to no stimulation, with effects concentrated in frontal and central regions¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? SW power was significantly higher in both cueing groups than CNT in the All and L3 conditions. → Shin 2025
q3 i? Spindle power was significantly higher in the personalized TMR group than CNT in both conditions. → Shin 2025 (2)
Evidence¶
Shin 2025¶
Shin, G.-H., Kweon, Y.-S., Oh, S., & Lee, S.-W. (2025). Personalized targeted memory reactivation enhances consolidation of challenging memories via slow wave and spindle dynamics. npj Science of Learning 10:47. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00340-3
q3 · i? · causal · r2
EEG feature comparison across the three groups in the All condition: SW power was significantly higher in both the personalized TMR and TMR groups relative to the no-stimulation control group.
"Post-hoc t-tests indicated that SW power was significantly higher in the personalized TMR group compared to CNT (t22 = 2.72,p = 0.013) and in the TMR group compared to CNT (t22 = 3.79, p = 0.001)."
Shin 2025 (2)¶
Shin, G.-H., Kweon, Y.-S., Oh, S., & Lee, S.-W. (2025). Personalized targeted memory reactivation enhances consolidation of challenging memories via slow wave and spindle dynamics. npj Science of Learning 10:47. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00340-3
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Spindle power comparisons: the personalized TMR group exceeded CNT in both the All and L3 conditions, while the article reports the significant spindle increase in the TMR group appeared only in the personalized protocol's discussion framing.
"Post-hoct-tests showed that spindle power was significantly higher in the personalized TMR group compared to CNT in both the All (t22 = 2.77, p =0 . 0 1 1 )a n dL 3(t22 = 2.63, p = 0.015) conditions."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Full word-pair cues can promote rather than disrupt reactivation when delivered with sufficient spacing and during stable NREM sleep — related
- Personalized TMR improves recall accuracy for the most challenging (L3) word pairs, outperforming both uniform TMR and no-stimulation control in the post-sleep session — related
- Multivariate classification of SW power, spindle power, and SW-spindle coupling distinguishes the personalized TMR, TMR, and control groups above chance, peaking around 3 s after cue onset — related
- Closed-loop auditory stimulation of slow oscillations and spindles evokes significant neurophysiological responses compared to sham in healthy young adults. — a broader claim this one bears on
- Cortical delta oscillations during slow-wave sleep support declarative memory consolidation — related
- Hippocampal sharp-wave ripples during SWS and waking support memory consolidation and spatial task performance — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
tmr-elevates-sw-spindle-power-nrem |
title |
Auditory cueing during NREM sleep elevates slow wave and spindle power relative to no stimulation, with effects concentrated in frontal and central regions |
description |
Auditory cueing during NREM sleep elevates slow wave and spindle power relative to no stimulation, with effects concentrated in frontal and central regions |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — shin-2025, shin-2025-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.