Anticipating the outcomes of one’s own actions is an integral feature of goal-directed behaviour. Zwosta et al. (2015) have shown in an fMRI study that the inferior parietal lobule (IPL) is involved in outcome-based action planning, where predictable action-outcomes are explicitly used for action selection. More specifically, the explicit usage of action-outcome representations led to increased functional coupling between IPL and prefrontal, subcortical and cerebellar areas (Zwosta et al., 2015). Based on this correlational relationship between IPL activation and connectivity and outcome anticipation, we want to investigate further a possible causal link between IPL function and outcome anticipation by means of online TMS. Experimental paradigm: The employed experimental paradigm (Zwosta et al., 2013) contains three experimental conditions: An outcome-based condition, during which subjects are required to produce specific colour outcomes which are indicated by the cue presented at the beginning of each trial, a stimulus-based condition where the cue does not indicate a to-be-produced outcome but a stimulus-response rule and finally a control condition where stimulus-response rules are cued but outcomes are random. In both the outcome-based and the stimulus-based conditions outcomes are contingent on the performed responses towards the presented stimuli and can be anticipated. However, only in the outcome-based condition outcome anticipation is actually needed to perform the task. The critical dependent variable is the response-outcome compatibility effect which denotes the difference in response times and error rates between trials where the manual response is spatially compatible with the resulting outcome and trials where it is incompatible. This compatibility effect reflects the anticipation of action outcomes during response selection and was found only in the outcome-based but not in the stimulus-based condition suggesting selective outcome anticipation only when it is required to successfully perform the task (Zwosta et al., 2013). Stimulation procedure: We apply short TMS trains (4 pulses with 10 Hz) in half of the trials during the task cue before the stimulus is presented and a response can be made. There is evidence (Zwosta et al., unpublished fMRI data) that outcome anticipation takes place during this cue presentation. In the verum TMS group we stimulate the IPL with 120% resting motor threshold (rMT). In the sham TMS group we also stimulate...