SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Supplementary Methods and Results

1

Subjects, procedure, and memory tasks

Subjects: Thirteen subjects (7 women) with a mean age of 23.8 yr (range 20 - 28 yr), free of
medication and non-smokers participated in the studies after having given informed written
consent. Subjects with, or the history of any of the following were excluded: epilepsy,
paroxysms, cognitive impairments, mental, hormonal, metabolic, circulatory disorders or
sleep disturbances. The experimental protocol was approved by the ethics committee of the
University of Lbeck.
Procedure: After an adaptation night subjects were tested in two conditions, a stimulation
condition and a sham stimulation condition, which were balanced in order across subjects (cp.
Supplementary Figure 1 for a summary of the procedure and the main findings of the paper).
The two sessions of a subject were separated by an interval of at least 1 week. Subjects
arrived at the laboratory at 19:00 h. Following preparation for slow oscillation stimulation,
EEG and polysomnographic recordings, subjects performed on tasks of declarative memory
(verbal and non-verbal paired-associate learning) and procedural memory (mirror tracing,
finger sequence tapping) between 21:00 and 22:30 h (learning period). The order of tasks was
balanced across subjects. Subjects subsequently went to bed, and polysomnographic and EEG
recordings started (lights off: 23:00 h, awakening: 06:30 h). Slow oscillation stimulation
began after the subject had attained 4 min of stable NonREM sleep for the first time after
sleep onset, i.e., after online scoring confirmed the presence of eight consecutive 30-s epochs
of sleep stage 2 or a deeper NonREM sleep stage. After 7.5 hours of sleep subjects were
awakened, whenever they were in light NonREM sleep (stages 1 or 2). About 30 min after
awakening, recall of memories was examined (retrieval period). Before learning and after
recall testing also psychometric control tests were given to assess general retrieval function,
working memory, capabilities to concentrate as well as feelings of tiredness and mood (see
Section 6).
Memory tasks and psychometric tests: To assess declarative memory, a paired-associate
learning task was used that had proven sensitive to effects of sleep previously1,2. The task
consists of the sequential presentation of 46 semantically related pairs of German nouns (see
Supplementary Information 2, Word Lists) on a monitor with a presentation rate of 1/5 s and
1

an interstimulus interval of 100 ms. In addition, 4 dummy pairs of words at the beginning and
end of each list served to buffer primacy and recency effects, respectively. A different word
list was used for each of the subject's two experimental sessions. At learning before sleep,
presentation of the list was followed by a task of cued recall, i.e., the subject was to respond
by naming the second word on presentation of the first (cue) word of each pair, whereby the
46 stimulus words of the word list appeared on the screen in a different order than during the
foregoing presentation. The subject had unlimited time to recall the appropriate response
word. Immediately after word recall the correct paired-associate was revealed on the screen.
The number of correct responses was calculated immediately after presentation of all cue
words. If a minimum of 60 % correct responses was not obtained, word pairs were presented
again in a newly randomized order (to prevent serial learning) and cued recall was repeated.
At retrieval testing in the morning following sleep cue words were again displayed in a newly
randomized order, and the subject was required to recall the appropriate response words.
Overnight memory retention is represented by the difference in the number of recalled words
between morning retrieval testing and evening immediate recall. It is to note that this measure
does not allow differentiating between processes of memory stabilization (slowed decay) and
enhancement that have been proposed to underlie procedural memory consolidation (see e.g.,
ref. 3).
To test procedural memory, a finger sequence tapping task was used (adapted from ref.
4). Subjects were required to repeatedly finger-tap with the non-dominant left hand a fiveelement sequence presented on a computer monitor, e.g. 4-2-3-1-4, as fast and accurately as
possible on a key board. The training period before sleep consisted of twelve 30-s intervals
with 30-s breaks between trials. Retrieval testing after sleep consisted of a practice run
followed by three 30-s test intervals. A working memory component of the task was excluded
by continuous presentation of the sequence on the screen. To prohibit interference no
feedback was given on pressing keys. Each 30-s interval was scored for the number of
correctly completed sequences and the number of errors made. Performance at learning and
retrieval testing was defined by averaged scores from the final three intervals during the
learning period, and from the three intervals of the retrieval period, respectively.
For exploratory purposes, in a subgroup of 10 subjects declarative and procedural
memory was tested additionally on a nonverbal paired-associate task and a mirror tracing
task, respectively. (Results for these tasks are presented in Supplementary Fig. 1b). On the
non-verbal paired associate task, instead of word-pairs, subjects were shown a list of 16
evenly balanced pairs of either geometric or non-geometric line-drawings (adapted from ref.
2

5). During learning, presentation of the list was followed by a cued recognition task in which
subjects had unlimited time to recall the appropriate response drawing from a group of seven
simultaneously presented other drawings. Learning ended when a minimum of 10 correct
responses was reached on a run. At retrieval testing the cued recognition task was repeated
using a newly randomized order of presentation. The mirror tracing task was adopted from
previous studies indicating a beneficial effect on memory performance for this task of sleep
during the second, REM sleep dominated half of the night, but not of sleep during the first
half alone 1. In this task subjects had to trace as fast and as accurately as possible line-drawn
meaningless figures while these figures and their hand movements were visible only through a
mirror. A parallel set of figures (with 26 to 27 angles and curved corners) were used for
testing. Subjects traced each figure with an electronic stylus starting and ending at the same
point. An error consisted of moving the stylus off the line of the figure. At learning, subjects
first performed practice runs with a star-like figure until draw time was less than 1 min and
less than 12 errors were made, and then continued with 4 runs with the test figure. At retrieval
testing, after one practice run, performance on 4 runs on the test figure was examined. On
each occasion, the total time to trace a figure, the number of errors and the error time (time off
the line) were measured, and averaged across the 4 runs.

Slow oscillation stimulation and sleep recordings

Slow oscillation stimulation: Potential fields oscillating at a frequency of 0.75 Hz (0.33 son/0.33 s-off with rising and falling slopes of 0.33 s) were induced by a battery driven
constant current stimulator via stimulation electrodes (8 mm diameter) applied bilaterally at
frontolateral locations, i.e., F3 and F4 of the international 10:20 system6 and at the mastoids.
Cortical effects of transcranial electrical stimulation, although rather widespread in nature,
depend strongly on the positioning of stimulation electrodes7. Frontal-to-mastoid stimulation
was chosen since endogeneous slow oscillations are maximal and originate primarily in the
prefrontal cortex8. Electrode resistance was always < 2 kOhm. In the sham-session the
electrodes were applied as in the stimulation sessions, but the stimulator remained off. Pilot
studies assured that stimulation was not felt by the subjects even when awake.
EEG recordings: The EEG was recorded continuously using a Toennies DC/AC amplifier
(Jaeger GmbH, Germany; amplification, 1000 VV-1). EEG signals were filtered between
0.0835 Hz and sampled with 200 Hz and 16-bit precision (CED 1401 plus, Cambridge
Electronics, UK). Ag-AgCl electrodes were placed according the 10-20 System (Fz, Cz, Pz,
3

C3, C4, P3, P4, F7, F8, T3, T4) and referenced to the nose. Additionally, horizontal and
vertical eye movements and the electromyogram (chin) were recorded for standard
polysomnography.

Analyses of sleep measures and EEG

Two types of analyses were performed off-line. First, sleep structure was determined visually
based on standard polysomnographic criteria9. For the total sleep period every 30-s epoch was
scored as NonREM sleep stage 1, 2, 3, 4 or REM sleep. Slow wave sleep (SWS) was
determined as the sum of time in sleep stages 3 and 4. Intervals during acute stimulation were
not scored due to excessive signal artifacts. In the sham stimulation session corresponding
intervals (starting after the presence of eight consecutive 30-s epochs of sleep stage 2 or a
deeper NonREM sleep stage) were also not scored. Scoring for the 1-min stimulation-free
intervals (between the 5-min blocks of acute stimulation) was additionally performed for 10-s
epochs. Time spent in the different sleep stages was determined (i) for the 1-min stimulationfree intervals and corresponding 1-min intervals of the sham stimulation condition, (ii) for a
60-min interval subsequent to the end of stimulation, and (iii) for the total nights.
In a second, more fine-grained analysis, the immediate influence of stimulation on
EEG power was investigated. Up to five non-overlapping blocks of artifact-free EEG with
2,048 data points each ( 10.2 s) were used for every 1-min stimulation-free interval and
corresponding intervals of sham-stimulation. On every 2,048-point block of EEG data, a
Hanning window was applied before calculating the power spectra using fast Fourier
transformations. Individual mean power spectra across all blocks of a stimulation-free interval
were calculated and subjected to a three-point moving average. Subsequently, mean power in
the following EEG bands was calculated: slow oscillations (0.51 Hz), low delta (11.5 Hz),
delta (14 Hz), theta (48 Hz), slow frontal spindle (812 Hz), fast parietal spindle (1215
Hz) and beta (1525 Hz). Frequency bands were selected on the basis of the mean power
spectrum and previous research: The slow oscillations show a predominant frequency of 0.7
0.8 Hz10-12. Cellular activity underlying the slow oscillation as well as the temporal dynamics
of slow oscillations across sleep episodes clearly differ from those of the faster (14 Hz) delta
oscillations10,12,13. Nevertheless due to their shape slow oscillations can affect the low
frequencies of the delta band8,11,14,15, which led us to separately explore effects on the 11.5
Hz frequency band immediately adjacent to the slow oscillation band. The separate spindle
bands refer to studies of the human EEG which have consistently demonstrated the presence
of two kinds of spindle activity, i.e., slow spindle activity that prevails over the frontal cortex
4

and shows a greater topographical variability than the faster spindle activity that concentrates
over the parietal cortex16-18. A functional differentiation has been suggested whereby the slow
spindle activity appears to reflect predominant coupling among cortical networks, whereas the
fast spindle activity is presumed to be more closely associated with thalamo-cortical
coupling19. For statistical analysis mean power within a 1-min interval immediately preceding
stimulation and sham-stimulation onset was subtracted from the mean power during
stimulation-free intervals.

Statistical analyses

Statistical analysis was based generally on analyses of variance (ANOVA), including a

within-subject factor Stimulation condition (slow oscillation stimulation versus sham
stimulation). Additional repeated measure factors were either Time (evening, morning), or for
EEG spectral analyses the five stimulation-free intervals. Where appropriate, a GreenhouseGeisser correction for degrees of freedom was used. Regarding behavioural measures of
memory, prior to statistical analysis difference values (between performance at retrieval after
sleep minus performance at learning before sleep) were calculated to indicate retention. For
data lacking normal distribution the Wilcoxon test was employed. A P-value < 0.05 was
considered significant.

Spindle counts

In addition to EEG spindle power, the number of slow frontal and fast parietal discrete
spindles (spindle density for each 30-s epoch) was analysed as a further measure of spindle
activity. Detection of spindles based on an algorithm adopted from previous studies20,21: First,
the EEG signal was filtered in the corresponding frequency bands (812 Hz, 1215 Hz), then
the root mean square (RMS) of each 100-ms interval was calculated, and lastly the number of
times were counted for which the RMS signal exceeded a threshold (adapted to visually
identified templates) for 0.5-3 s. Confirming the results for EEG spindle power as described
in the main text, analyses of discrete spindle counts during the 1-minute stimulation-free
intervals revealed a significant increase with stimulation as compared with sham stimulation
for slow spindles over the frontal location (4.14 1.13 versus 2.76 0.92 spindles x 30 s-1,
F1,12 = 5.89, P < 0.05). In contrast, there was no significant difference between the stimulation
and sham conditions during these intervals in fast spindle counts over the parietal location
(2.56 0.96 versus 3.05 1.15 spindles x 30 s-1, P > 0.5).

Control of unspecific cognitive and hormonal effects of stimulation

In the main experiments stimulation was applied during early sleep after learning and recall
was tested the next morning. This procedure, in principle, leaves open the possibility that
changes in recall reflect a lasting effect of the stimulation on general cognition or capabilities
of retrieval that extends into the time of retrieval testing, rather than an effect on the
consolidation of respective memories. To rule out such influences, performance on several
cognitive function test and mood were assessed at retrieval testing. Additionally, two separate
control experiments were conducted and blood concentrations of several relevant hormones
were assessed.
Cognitive function tests and mood at retrieval testing: To assess the general capability to
retrieve information from long term memory, a word fluency task22 was used which required
the subject to write down within 2-min periods, respectively, as many kinds of either jobs or
hobbies, and words starting with the letter M or P. For working memory assessment, the
digit span test of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale was employed, which requires to
repeat lists of orally presented digits forward and backward. Mood was assessed by the
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS)23, and an adjective check list24 describing
the subject's current mood on various dimensions (e.g., feelings of activation, tiredness,
concentration, enthusiasm).
Performance on the word fluency task was virtually identical in both conditions (19.53
0.75 (stimulation) versus 19.87 0.88 words retrieved) indicating that slow oscillation
stimulation during sleep did not affect the subjects ability to access previously stored
knowledge on words at the time of retrieval testing (P > 0.6). Also, performance on the digit
span test was not improved, but on average was slightly lower after slow oscillation
stimulation (9.49 0.65 digits) compared with sham stimulation (10.39 0.56 digits, P >
0.15) ruling out that enhanced declarative memory recall after stimulation was a consequence
of a general improvement in prefrontal working memory function. Mood scores were also not
affected by stimulation (P > 0.2) (There were also no differences in these measures between
the two conditions at learning.)
Additional control experiments: In the main experiments stimulation started soon after
learning during the first period of NonREM sleep. If the enhanced declarative memory after
slow oscillation stimulation reflected directly a facilitatory effect on retrieval performance
rather than on consolidation this action should be enhanced by positioning the stimulation
6

closer to retrieval testing. To test this possibility we performed two control experiments both
conducted according to within-subject crossover comparisons (stimulation versus sham) in
two different samples of 8 subjects (19 - 35 yr, 3 females and 5 males in each sample). In the
first experiment, the protocol was exactly identical to that in the main experiment including
stimulation and tasks except that stimulation was shifted to a period shortly before awakening,
i.e., the slow oscillation stimulation began 45 min prior to and ended 15 min prior to
awakening (at 6.30 h). Stimulation was performed independently of the presence of a certain
sleep stage and started during stage 2 NonREM sleep in 6 subjects and during REM sleep in 2
subjects. Performance on the word paired-associate task did not differ between the stimulation
and sham conditions (words recalled at learning before sleep, 36.58 1.88 (stimulation),
37.94 1.69 (sham), words recalled after sleep, 39.79 2.02 (stimulation), 40.87 1.13
(sham), P > 0.4, for all comparisons). There were also no significant effects of stimulation
conducted shortly before awakening on procedural memory for finger tapping skill
(improvement in correctly tapped sequences at retrieval after sleep with reference to
performance at learning, 2.61 0.54 (stimulation), 2.55 0.55 (sham), P > 0.5) or on
measures of vigilance at retrieval testing (P > 0.5).
Since it could be argued that non-specific cognitive effects arise from slow oscillation
stimulation only when applied during the SWS-rich early part of sleep, i.e. a brain state
particularly sensitive to this stimulation, we performed a second control experiment where
stimulation took place, as in the main experiment, during early NonREM sleep and the
retrieval period was again 30 min after awakening. However, to avoid an effect on sleep
associated processes of consolidation presumed to be strongest shortly after learning, learning
and recall were separated by 4 nights and stimulation was delayed until the fourth night, i.e.,
the last night before recall testing25. Experimental procedures were otherwise the same as in
the main experiment, except that because of the prolonged retention interval (during which
forgetting becomes prevalent) the learning criterion was set to 80 % correct responses for the
word paired-associate task. The two learning sessions were separated by an interval of at least
10 days. Also in this control experiment slow oscillation stimulation failed to improve recall
of word-pairs with on average even more words forgotten across the 4-day retention interval
in the stimulation than in the sham condition (-7.13 1.75 versus -5.38 1.38 words, P >
0.23). Also, procedural memory recall of finger tapping skill and measures of vigilance at
retrieval testing remained on average non-significantly lower after stimulation than sham
stimulation.

Blood hormone concentrations: There is evidence that consolidation of declarative memories

is affected by hormones such as corticosteroids and catecholamines which are regulated by
sleep and appear to target specifically hippocampal function26,27. To examine whether slow
oscillation stimulation alters secretion of such hormones during sleep, the latter control
experiments included additionally the assessment of blood concentrations of cortisol, growth
hormone and norepinephrine every 15 min during the stimulation and every 30-60 min during
the remaining night. For blood sampling, a catheter was connected to a long, thin tube
enabling blood collection from an adjacent room without disturbing the subjects sleep. Blood
samples for determining cortisol and growth hormone concentrations in serum were
immediately centrifuged and the supernatant stored at 20C until assay. Cortisol and growth
hormone were measured by ELISA (Immulite, Diagnostic Products Corporation Biermann,
Bad Nauheim, Germany; cortisol: sensitivity, 0.2 gdL-1; intra- and interassay coefficients of
variation: < 8.8 and < 10 %, respectively; growth hormone: sensitivity, 0.01 ngmL-1; intraand interassay coefficients of variation: < 6.2 and < 6.2 %, respectively). Standard HPLC with
electrochemical detection was used for plasma norepinephrine detection (sensitivity, 15 ngL-1,
intra- and interassay coefficients of variation < 3.9 and < 5.9 %). We found no effects of
stimulation on any of the hormones measured (P > 0.5).

Supplementary Figure and Legend

a

Learning

Sleep

Recall
*
Figures

1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5

Procedural

Declarative

Procedural

Sham Stimulation

Draw time (s)

Declarative

-24
-16
-8
0

Sham Stimulation

Supplementary Figure 1 a, Stimulating the brain with slowly oscillating (0.75 Hz) potential
fields during early NonREM sleep after learning of declarative and procedural memory tasks
improves later recall of the declarative but not of the procedural memories. The slow
oscillation stimulation leads to an immediate potentiation of endogenous slow oscillation and
spindle activity (red). Thereby stimulation presumably enhances the efficacy of a slow
oscillation-driven hippocampo-neocortical dialogue enabling the reprocessing and
consolidation of declarative memories during sleep. b, Recall performance on two additional
memory tasks introduced for exploratory purposes in a subgroup of 10 subjects. Consistent
with results from word paired-associate learning (main text), slow oscillation stimulation (red)
compared with sham stimulation (black bars), improved cued recognition of figures on the
non-verbal declarative task (P < 0.05; top panel indicates the difference between recognition
performance at retrieval testing after sleep minus performance at learning before sleep). In the
stimulation condition performance improved from 11.60 0.52 figures before sleep to 12.40
0.62 figures recognized after sleep, whereas in the sham stimulation condition cued
recognition performance was lower after sleep (11.10 0.67 figures) than at learning before
sleep (11.30 0.42 figures). In contrast to declarative memory performance, performance on
the procedural mirror-tracing task (like finger tapping, described in the main text), did not
reveal significant facilitation by electrical stimulation (P > 0.2; bottom panel indicating
improvement in draw time (s) with reference to performance at learning). However in both
conditions the typical overnight improvement was observed (P < 0.001, stimulation condition,
draw time before sleep: 94.00 14.69 s, after sleep: 73.23 11.75 s; sham condition, before
sleep: 92.90 14.78 s, after sleep: 70.85 7.43 s).

Supplementary Table 1
Table 1

Sleep during the nights of the Stimulation and Sham condition

Entire night

Awake %
S1 %
S2 %
S3 %
S4 %
SWS %
REM %
Total sleep time (min)

Stimulation
(mean SEM)
1.9 0.6
7.2 1.5
50.6 2.5
8.3 0.8
2.9 1.1
10.2 1.4
20.7 1.6
420.2 9.6

Sham
(mean SEM)
3.7 2.3
5.7 1.5
49.7 1.7
8.6 1.2
3.5 1.1
12.1 1.9
20.6 2.1
426.2 6.4

Stimulation
(mean SEM)
4.6 4.0
2.4 1.0
57.2 5.1
13.6 1.8
8.1 3.6
21.7 4.9
13.6 3.2

Sham
(mean SEM)
6.2 2.9
6.6 3.4
59.4 6.1
11.7 2.6
5.2 2.4
16.9 4.1
10.5 3.5

The hour following stimulation

Awake %
S1 %
S2 %
S3 %
S4 %
SWS %
REM %

Top panel indicates mean ( standard error of the mean) percentages (%) of total sleep time
spent in different sleep stages during the entire night. Bottom panel indicates percentage of
time in the different sleep stages during the hour following stimulation. Total sleep time
defines the time from sleep onset until awakening. There were no significant differences
between the slow oscillation stimulation and sham stimulation conditions. S1-S4, sleep stages
1-4; SWS, slow-wave sleep; REM, rapid-eye-movement sleep. Note the 30-min interval of
stimulation and the corresponding interval in the sham condition were excluded from analysis
of the entire nights, which decreases the proportion of SWS typically dominating this period
of sleep.

10

Supplementary References
1. Plihal, W. & Born, J. Effects of early and late nocturnal sleep on declarative and
procedural memory. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 9, 534-547 (1997).
2. Marshall, L., Mlle, M., Hallschmid, M. & Born, J. Transcranial direct current
stimulation during sleep improves declarative memory. J. Neurosci. 24, 9985-9992
(2004).
3. Walker, M. P. & Stickgold, R. Sleep-dependent learning and memory consolidation.
Neuron 44, 121-133 (2004).
4. Walker, M. P., Brakefield, T., Morgan, A., Hobson, J. A. & Stickgold, R. Practice with
sleep makes perfect: sleep-dependent motor skill learning. Neuron 35, 205-211 (2002).
5. Sturm, W. & Willmes, K. [Verbal and nonverbal learning test (VLT/NVLT)] German.
Hogrefe, Gttingen (1999).
6. Jasper, H. H. The ten-twenty electrode system of the International Federation.
Electroencephalographalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 10, 371-375 (1958).
7. Nitsche, M. A. & Paulus, W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by
weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J. Physiol 527 Pt 3, 633-639 (2000).
8. Massimini, M., Huber, R., Ferrarelli, F., Hill, S. & Tononi, G. The sleep slow oscillation
as a traveling wave. J. Neurosci. 24, 6862-6870 (2004).
9. Rechtschaffen, A. & Kales, A. A manual of standardized terminology, techniques and
scoring system for sleep stages of human subjects. NIH Publ. 204, US Government
Printing Office, Washington (1968).
10. Achermann, P. & Borbely, A. A. Low-frequency (< 1 Hz) oscillations in the human
sleep electroencephalogram. Neuroscience 81, 213-222 (1997).
11. Mlle, M., Marshall, L., Gais, S. & Born, J. Grouping of spindle activity during slow
oscillations in human non-rapid eye movement sleep. J. Neurosci. 22, 10941-10947
(2002).
12. Steriade, M. Grouping of brain rhythms in corticothalamic systems. Neuroscience 137,
1087-1106 (2006).
13. Amzica, F. & Steriade, M. Electrophysiological correlates of sleep delta waves.
Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 107, 69-83 (1998).
14. Amzica, F. & Steriade, M. Cellular substrates and laminar profile of sleep K-complex.
Neuroscience 82, 671-686 (1998).
11

15. Steriade, M. The corticothalamic system in sleep. Front Biosci 8, d878-899 (2003).
16. De Gennaro, L. & Ferrara, M. Sleep spindles: an overview. Sleep Med Rev 7, 423-440
(2003).
17. Werth, E., Achermann, P., Dijk, D. J. & Borbely, A. A. Spindle frequency activity in the
sleep EEG: individual differences and topographic distribution. Electroencephalogr.
Clin. Neurophysiol. 103, 535-542 (1997).
18. Bodizs, R. et al. Prediction of general mental ability based on neural oscillation
measures of sleep. J. Sleep Res 14, 285-292 (2005).
19. Doran, S. M. The dynamic topography of individual sleep spindles. Sleep Research
Online 5, 133-139 (2003).
20. Schimicek, P., Zeitlhofer, J., Anderer, P. & Saletu, B. Automatic sleep-spindle detection
procedure: aspects of reliability and validity. Clin. Electroencephalogr. 25, 26-29
(1994).
21. Gais, S., Mlle, M., Helms, K. & Born, J. Learning-dependent increases in sleep spindle
density. J. Neurosci. 22, 6830-6834 (2002).
22. Aschenbrenner, S., Tucha, K. W. & Lange, W. Regensburger Wortflssigkeits-Test
(RWT) [Regensburg Word Fluency Test]. Gttingen (2000).
23. Watson, D., Clark, L. A. & Tellegen, A. Development and validation of brief measures
of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 10631070 (1998).
24. Janke, W. & Debus, G. Die Eigenschaftswrterliste EWL. Eine mehrdimensionale
Methode zur Beschreibung von Aspekten des Befindens. Hogrefe, Gttingen (1978).
25. Rasch, B. H., Born, J. & Gais, S. Combined blockade of cholinergic receptors shifts the
brain from stimulus encoding to memory consolidation. J. Cogn Neurosci. 18, 793-802
(2006).
26. Born, J. & Wagner, U. Memory consolidation during sleep: role of cortisol feedback.
Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1032, 198-201 (2004).
27. McGaugh, J. L. & Roozendaal, B. Role of adrenal stress hormones in forming lasting
memories in the brain. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12, 205-210 (2002).
See Marshall, L., Mlle, M. & Born, J. Oscillating current stimulation Slow oscillation
stimulation during sleep. Nature Protocols doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.299 (in press) for further
information.

12