Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 693

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Empirical Analyses of BOLD fMRI Statistics

Open access
Zarahn, E., Aguirre, G.K., D'Esposito, M.·1997·NeuroImage

Abstract

Temporal autocorrelation, spatial coherency, and their effects on voxel-wise parametric statistics were examined in BOLD fMRI null-hypothesis, or "noise," datasets. Seventeen normal, young subjects were scanned using BOLD fMRI while not performing any time-locked experimental behavior. Temporal autocorrelation in these datasets was described well by a 1/frequency relationship. Voxel-wise statistical analysis of these noise datasets which assumed independence (i.e., ignored temporal autocorrelation) rejected the null hypothesis at a higher rate than specified by the nominal alpha. Temporal smoothing in conjunction with the use of a modified general linear model (Worsley and Friston, 1995, NeuroImage 2: 173-182) brought the false-positive rate closer to the nominal alpha. It was also found that the noise fMRI datasets contain spatially coherent time signals. This observed spatial coherence could not be fully explained by a continuously differentiable spatial autocovariance function and was much greater for lower temporal frequencies. Its presence made voxel-wise test statistics in a given noise dataset dependent, and thus shifted their distributions to the right or left of 0. Inclusion of a "global signal" covariate in the general linear model reduced this dependence and consequently stabilized (i.e., reduced the variance of) dataset false-positive rates.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/nimg.1997.0263

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 693

Metadata

Authors
Zarahn, E., Aguirre, G. K., & D'Esposito, M.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-04
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
179-197
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2971002144
Cited by
693
References
2
FWCI
26.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.