4.7 Article

Assessing inter-individual differences with task-related functional neuroimaging

Journal

NATURE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR
Volume 3, Issue 9, Pages 897-905

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0681-8

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NWO Veni [451-15-015]
  2. Swiss National Found Ambizione grant [PZ00P3_174127]
  3. Bettencourt-Schueller Foundation
  4. ATIP-Avenir grant [R16069JS]
  5. Programme Emergence(s) de la Ville de Paris
  6. Fyssen foundation
  7. Fondation Schlumberger pour l'Education et la Recherche
  8. LabEx IEC [ANR-10-LABX-0087 IEC]
  9. IDEX PSL* [ANR-10IDEX-0001-02 PSL*]
  10. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [PZ00P3_174127] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Explaining and predicting individual behavioural differences induced by clinical and social factors constitutes one of the most promising applications of neuroimaging. In this Perspective, we discuss the theoretical and statistical foundations of the analyses of inter-individual differences in task-related functional neuroimaging. Leveraging a five-year literature review (July 2013-2018), we show that researchers often assess how activations elicited by a variable of interest differ between individuals. We argue that the rationale for such analyses, typically grounded in resource theory, offers an over-large analytical and interpretational flexibility that undermines their validity. We also recall how, in the established framework of the general linear model, inter-individual differences in behaviour can act as hidden moderators and spuriously induce differences in activations. We conclude with a set of recommendations and directions, which we hope will contribute to improving the statistical validity and the neurobiological interpretability of inter-individual difference analyses in task-related functional neuroimaging.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available