Results
anxiety
To make sure that three groups are comparable across conditions, we first checked the demographic information. Overall, no significant differences in terms of the age were observed among the three stimulation groups, Ages and emotion scores for tDCS groups (mean ± SD).tDCS effects across experiments. Cathodal tDCS over the rTPJ diminished outcome evaluation when the intention is good. *Then, a four-way repeated measure ANOVA was performed with intention (good vs. unknown vs. bad), outcome (good vs. bad), and phase (pre-tDCS vs. post-tDCS) as within-subject variables, stimulation group (anodal, cathodal, sham) as a between-subject variable, and the rating scores as a dependent variable. Our results have revealed a significant interaction effect among the four factors (F (4, 118) = 2.543, Further comparison between pre- and post-stimulation for the cathodal group were performed across three intention levels to address how cathodal stimulation modulated intention attribution. Specially, we found that the cathodal stimulation over the rTPJ largely diminished the goodness rating of both good outcome (pre vs. post: M = 4.59 ± 1.09 vs. M = 4.03 ± 1.22, Lastly, statistics on the subjective questionnaires revealed no difference on the subjective ratings towards anxiety, positive/negative affect, and uncomfortableness levels during stimulation (see Table 