Barbara Penolazzi

Prof. Dr. Barbara Penolazzi


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2007 in Biological Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BPBarbara Penolazzi
Barbara Penolazzi
OHOlaf Hauk
Olaf Hauk
FPFriedemann Pulvermüller
Friedemann Pulvermüller

1 May 2015 in Experimental Brain Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DSDavide Francesco Stramaccia
Davide Francesco Stramaccia
BPBarbara Penolazzi
Barbara Penolazzi
GSGiulia Sartori
Giulia Sartori
Miriam BragaMiriam Braga
Miriam Braga
SMSara Mondini
Sara Mondini
GGGiovanni Galfano
Giovanni Galfano

1 February 2008 in Biological Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CSChiara Spironelli
Chiara Spironelli
BPBarbara Penolazzi
Barbara Penolazzi
AAAlessandro Angrilli
Alessandro Angrilli

1 May 2003 in Brain and Language
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MVMarica De Vincenzi
Marica De Vincenzi
RJRemo Job
Remo Job
RMRosalia Di Matteo
Rosalia Di Matteo
AAAlessandro Angrilli
Alessandro Angrilli
BPBarbara Penolazzi
Barbara Penolazzi
FVFrancesco Vespignani
Francesco Vespignani

7 May 2014 in Journal of Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BPBarbara Penolazzi
Barbara Penolazzi
DSDavide Francesco Stramaccia
Davide Francesco Stramaccia
Miriam BragaMiriam Braga
Miriam Braga
SMSara Mondini
Sara Mondini
GGGiovanni Galfano
Giovanni Galfano
Retrieving information from long-term memory can result in the episodic forgetting of related material. One influential account states that this retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) phenomenon reflects inhibitory mechanisms called into play to decrease retrieval competition. Recent neuroimaging studies suggested that the prefrontal cortex, which is critically engaged in inhibitory processing, is also involved in retrieval competition situations. Here, we used transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to address whether inhibitory processes could be causally linked to RIF. tDCS was administered over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during the retrieval-practice phase in a standard retrieval-practice paradigm. Sixty human participants were randomly assigned to anodal, cathodal, or sham-control groups. The groups showed comparable benefits for practiced items. In contrast, unlike both the sham and anodal groups, the cathodal group exhibited no RIF. This pattern is interpreted as evidence for a causal role of inhibitory mechanisms in episodic retrieval and forgetting.

13 May 2010 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BPBarbara Penolazzi
Barbara Penolazzi
ADAlberto Di Domenico
Alberto Di Domenico
DMDaniele Marzoli
Daniele Marzoli
NMNicola Mammarella
Nicola Mammarella
BFBeth Fairfield
Beth Fairfield
LTLuca Tommasi
Luca Tommasi
The present study investigated emotional memory following bilateral transcranial electrical stimulation (direct current of 1 mA, for 20 minutes) over fronto-temporal cortical areas of healthy participants during the encoding of images that differed in affective arousal and valence. The main result was a significant interaction between the side of anodal stimulation and image emotional valence. Specifically, right anodal/left cathodal stimulation selectively facilitated the recall of pleasant images with respect to both unpleasant and neutral images whereas left anodal/right cathodal stimulation selectively facilitated the recall of unpleasant images with respect to both pleasant and neutral images. From a theoretical perspective, this double dissociation between the side of anodal stimulation and the advantage in the memory performance for a specific type of stimulus depending on its pleasantness supported the specific-valence hypothesis of emotional processes, which assumes a specialization of the right hemisphere in processing unpleasant stimuli and a specialization of the left hemisphere in processing pleasant stimuli. From a methodological point of view, first we found tDCS effects strictly dependent on the stimulus category, and second a pattern of results in line with an interfering and inhibitory account of anodal stimulation on memory performance. These findings need to be carefully considered in applied contexts, such as the rehabilitation of altered emotional processing or eye-witness memory, and deserve to be further investigated in order to understand their underlying mechanisms of action.