Results of random effects analysis for 1PP (1PP-baseline) relative to 3PP (3PP baseline) (p<0.05, FWE corrected, L = left hemisphere, R = right hemisphere, masked with real touch>baseline).

<p>Results of random effects analysis for 1PP (1PP-baseline) relative to 3PP (3PP baseline) (p<0.05, FWE corrected, L = left hemisphere, R = right hemisphere, masked with real touch>baseline).</p

Results of random effects analysis (p<0.05, FWE corrected, L = left hemisphere, R = right hemisphere, masked with real touch>baseline).

<p>Results of random effects analysis (p<0.05, FWE corrected, L = left hemisphere, R = right hemisphere, masked with real touch>baseline).</p

Results of experiment 2.

<p>A: Conditions of the experiment. See text for further details. B: Results revealed activation in SI both for touch hand (PS) and movements in peripersonal space (PPS) conditions. The conditions EPS, hands only and movement only failed to show significant activation of somatosensory brain areas (at p<0.05, FWE corrected, masked with real touch>baseline in order to reveal common activations with real touch). C: Contrast of parameter estimates for activations in left SI (based on ANOVA main effect, see text) demonstrates activation both for PS and PPS conditions, thus replicating the results of the first study. D: Statistical maps for the contrast PS>EPS and PPS>EPS revealed brain activation in left SI (FWE corrected, masked with real touch>baseline). E: Statistical maps for the contrast PPS>hands only show brain activation in left SI and left premotor cortex (FWE corrected, unmasked results).</p

Demographic and clinical characteristics for different groups.

<p>Demographic and clinical characteristics for different groups.</p

Conditions and types of stimuli used in the first experiment.

<p>The two pictures on the left depict the conditions touch hand and movements in peripersonal space, respectively, in 1PP. The two pictures on the right show touch hand and movements in peripersonal space, respectively, in 3PP.</p

Changes of allergic symptoms for open-label placebo and control group for single symptom groups (mean and standard error).

<p>Results show significant improvements for the open-label placebo group but not for the control group. * p < 0.05, (*) p = 0.06.</p

Brain responses in SI while subjects observe touch to a hand and movements close to a hand ( = PS and PPS) relative to baseline.

<p>A: Results for 1PP revealed activation in left SI for PS events. For PPS events results yielded only minor activation in SI. B: Results for 3PP depict activations in bilateral SI both for PS and PPS conditions. C: Contrast of parameter estimates for activations in left SI (MNI coordinates: −38 −40 52) during PS and PPS conditions relative to baseline. The left two bars show the results for 1PP, the right two bars depict results for 3PP. In the latter, PS as well as PPS events were associated with strong activation in SI, whereas the observation of PPS events revealed even higher activation than the PS condition. The data of the right SI (3PP only) were similar. All results were at p<0.05, FWE corrected, and masked with real touch relative to baseline in order to reveal common activations with somatosensory areas.</p

Statistical maps for the contrast 1PP (PS - baseline) relative to 3PP (PS - baseline).

<p>Results show brain activation in SI for 1PP (at p<0.05, FWE corrected, masked with real touch>baseline). The contrast 3PP (PS - baseline) relative to 1PP (PS - baseline) failed to show any significant voxels (at p<0.05, FWE corrected).</p

Changes of allergic symptoms for open-label placebo and control group (mean and standard error).

<p>Patients indicated their response on a seven-point scale ranging from ‘never’ (1) to ‘always’ (7) (composite score of all symptoms). Results demonstrate significantly stronger improvement for the open-label placebo group relative to the control group. * p = 0.02.</p

Change of mental or emotional quality of life (mental sum score of the SF-36) when receiving detailed information on placebos (raising positive expectancies) compared with no detailed information about the power of placebos.

<p>Results revealed stronger improvement of mental or emotional quality of life when being told that placebos are powerful (irrespective of receiving open-label placebos).</p