Modeling and inference of multisubject fMRI data

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a rapidly growing technique for studying the brain in action. Since its creation [1], [2], cognitive scientists have been using fMRI to understand how we remember, manipulate, and act on information in our environment. Working with magnetic resonance physicists, statisticians, and engineers, these scientists are pushing the frontiers of knowledge of how the human brain works. The design and analysis of single-subject fMRI studies has been well described. For example, [3], chapters 10 and 11 of [4], and chapters 11 and 14 of [5] all give accessible overviews of fMRI methods for one subject. In contrast, while the appropriate manner to analyze a group of subjects has been the topic of several recent papers, we do not feel it has been covered well in introductory texts and review papers. Therefore, in this article, we bring together old and new work on so-called group modeling of fMRI data using a consistent notation to make the methods more accessible and comparable

Can parametric statistical methods be trusted for fMRI based group studies?

The most widely used task fMRI analyses use parametric methods that depend on a variety of assumptions. While individual aspects of these fMRI models have been evaluated, they have not been evaluated in a comprehensive manner with empirical data. In this work, a total of 2 million random task fMRI group analyses have been performed using resting state fMRI data, to compute empirical familywise error rates for the software packages SPM, FSL and AFNI, as well as a standard non-parametric permutation method. While there is some variation, for a nominal familywise error rate of 5% the parametric statistical methods are shown to be conservative for voxel-wise inference and invalid for cluster-wise inference; in particular, cluster size inference with a cluster defining threshold of p = 0.01 generates familywise error rates up to 60%. We conduct a number of follow up analyses and investigations that suggest the cause of the invalid cluster inferences is spatial auto correlation functions that do not follow the assumed Gaussian shape. By comparison, the non-parametric permutation test, which is based on a small number of assumptions, is found to produce valid results for voxel as well as cluster wise inference. Using real task data, we compare the results between one parametric method and the permutation test, and find stark differences in the conclusions drawn between the two using cluster inference. These findings speak to the need of validating the statistical methods being used in the neuroimaging field

Reply to Chen et al.: Parametric methods for cluster inference perform worse for two-sided t-tests

One-sided t-tests are commonly used in the neuroimaging field, but two-sided tests should be the default unless a researcher has a strong reason for using a one-sided test. Here we extend our previous work on cluster false positive rates, which used one-sided tests, to two-sided tests. Briefly, we found that parametric methods perform worse for two-sided t-tests, and that non-parametric methods perform equally well for one-sided and two-sided tests

Cluster Failure Revisited: Impact of First Level Design and Data Quality on Cluster False Positive Rates

Methodological research rarely generates a broad interest, yet our work on the validity of cluster inference methods for functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) created intense discussion on both the minutia of our approach and its implications for the discipline. In the present work, we take on various critiques of our work and further explore the limitations of our original work. We address issues about the particular event-related designs we used, considering multiple event types and randomisation of events between subjects. We consider the lack of validity found with one-sample permutation (sign flipping) tests, investigating a number of approaches to improve the false positive control of this widely used procedure. We found that the combination of a two-sided test and cleaning the data using ICA FIX resulted in nominal false positive rates for all datasets, meaning that data cleaning is not only important for resting state fMRI, but also for task fMRI. Finally, we discuss the implications of our work on the fMRI literature as a whole, estimating that at least 10% of the fMRI studies have used the most problematic cluster inference method (P = 0.01 cluster defining threshold), and how individual studies can be interpreted in light of our findings. These additional results underscore our original conclusions, on the importance of data sharing and thorough evaluation of statistical methods on realistic null data

Striking First: Preemption and Prevention in International Conflict

Even before the United States and its al- lies embarked on war in Iraq in 2003, the question of whether it is acceptable to strike enemies without clear provo- cation was an increasingly vexing one to policy makers, academics, and legal ex- perts. “Preemptive war” (attacking an enemy who is clearly about to strike you first) has always been an acceptable response to a dire and clear threat. But “preventive war” (striking a potential enemy while circumstances are favor- able to the attacker, or striking in early anticipation of a possible, or even only theoretical, threat) has traditionally been regarded in the international community as not only unwise but immoral

An online peer-based spiritual mentoring program for field missionaries

https://place.asburyseminary.edu/ecommonsatsdissertations/1398/thumbnail.jp

Permutation Inference for Canonical Correlation Analysis

Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) has become a key tool for population neuroimaging, allowing investigation of associations between many imaging and non-imaging measurements. As other variables are often a source of variability not of direct interest, previous work has used CCA on residuals from a model that removes these effects, then proceeded directly to permutation inference. We show that such a simple permutation test leads to inflated error rates. The reason is that residualisation introduces dependencies among the observations that violate the exchangeability assumption. Even in the absence of nuisance variables, however, a simple permutation test for CCA also leads to excess error rates for all canonical correlations other than the first. The reason is that a simple permutation scheme does not ignore the variability already explained by previous canonical variables. Here we propose solutions for both problems: in the case of nuisance variables, we show that transforming the residuals to a lower dimensional basis where exchangeability holds results in a valid permutation test; for more general cases, with or without nuisance variables, we propose estimating the canonical correlations in a stepwise manner, removing at each iteration the variance already explained, while dealing with different number of variables in both sides. We also discuss how to address the multiplicity of tests, proposing an admissible test that is not conservative, and provide a complete algorithm for permutation inference for CCA.Comment: 49 pages, 2 figures, 10 tables, 3 algorithms, 119 reference