Literature DB >> 12204304

Hypothesis testing for selective, differential, and conjoined brain activation.

Jane E Joseph1, David J Partin, Karen M Jones.   

Abstract

Hypothesis testing in functional neuroimaging studies relies heavily on the computation of categorical contrasts in which brain activation associated with one experimental condition is assessed relative to brain activation associated with a different experimental condition. Often, multiple pair-wise contrasts are computed and reported independently. Here we describe an approach to hypothesis testing that logically combines multiple pair-wise contrasts to distinguish among selective, differential and conjoined brain activation patterns. Using a sample dataset in which participants viewed objects, visual noise patterns or a fixation cross, we demonstrate that selective and differential brain activation patterns are often confounded with current approaches to hypothesis testing but that the logical combination approach can distinguish between these two types of data patterns. Specifically, we show that brain regions that respond selectively to an object recognition task relative to viewing visual noise or a fixation cross (selective activation) are mutually exclusive from brain regions that show a graded response to object viewing, noise viewing and visual fixation (differential activation). We thus show that the logical combination approach sufficiently constrains the results of categorical contrasts to reflect only the data pattern that would be predicted from the cognitive processing account under investigation. Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science B.V.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12204304     DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0270(02)00122-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci Methods        ISSN: 0165-0270            Impact factor:   2.390


  8 in total

1.  Beyond risk and ambiguity: deciding under ignorance.

Authors:  Helen Pushkarskaya; Xun Liu; Michael Smithson; Jane E Joseph
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.282

2.  Control of shared representations relies on key processes involved in mental state attribution.

Authors:  Stephanie Spengler; D Yves von Cramon; Marcel Brass
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Predicting and memorizing observed action: differential premotor cortex involvement.

Authors:  Waltraud Stadler; Ricarda I Schubotz; D Yves von Cramon; Anne Springer; Markus Graf; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Progressive and regressive developmental changes in neural substrates for face processing: testing specific predictions of the Interactive Specialization account.

Authors:  Jane E Joseph; Ann D Gathers; Ramesh S Bhatt
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2011-03

5.  Process and domain specificity in regions engaged for face processing: an fMRI study of perceptual differentiation.

Authors:  Heather R Collins; Xun Zhu; Ramesh S Bhatt; Jonathan D Clark; Jane E Joseph
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  Mid-fusiform activation during object discrimination reflects the process of differentiating structural descriptions.

Authors:  Xun Liu; Nicholas A Steinmetz; Alison B Farley; Charles D Smith; Jane E Joseph
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Object recognition in clutter: cortical responses depend on the type of learning.

Authors:  Jay Hegdé; Serena K Thompson; Mark Brady; Daniel Kersten
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Pruning or tuning? Maturational profiles of face specialization during typical development.

Authors:  Xun Zhu; Ramesh S Bhatt; Jane E Joseph
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 2.708

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.