Social cognitive and affective neuroscience
-
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci · Dec 2009
Variation in orbitofrontal cortex volume: relation to sex, emotion regulation and affect.
Sex differences in brain structure have been examined extensively but are not completely understood, especially in relation to possible functional correlates. Our two aims in this study were to investigate sex differences in brain structure, and to investigate a possible relation between orbitofrontal cortex subregions and affective individual differences. We used tensor-based morphometry to estimate local brain volume from MPRAGE images in 117 healthy right-handed adults (58 female), age 18-40 years. ⋯ Men had larger left planum temporale. Women had larger ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), right lateral orbitofrontal (rlOFC), cerebellum, and bilateral basal ganglia and nearby white matter. vmPFC but not rlOFC volume covaried with self-reported emotion regulation strategies (reappraisal, suppression), expressivity of positive emotions (but not of negative), strength of emotional impulses, and cognitive but not somatic anxiety. vmPFC volume statistically mediated sex differences in emotion suppression. The results confirm prior reports of sex differences in orbitofrontal cortex structure, and are the first to show that normal variation in vmPFC volume is systematically related to emotion regulation and affective individual differences.
-
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci · Dec 2009
Type I and Type II error concerns in fMRI research: re-balancing the scale.
Statistical thresholding (i.e. P-values) in fMRI research has become increasingly conservative over the past decade in an attempt to diminish Type I errors (i.e. false alarms) to a level traditionally allowed in behavioral science research. In this article, we examine the unintended negative consequences of this single-minded devotion to Type I errors: increased Type II errors (i.e. missing true effects), a bias toward studying large rather than small effects, a bias toward observing sensory and motor processes rather than complex cognitive and affective processes and deficient meta-analyses. ⋯ This joint threshold produces high but acceptable Type II error rates and produces a FDR that is comparable to the effective FDR in typical behavioral science articles (while a 20 voxel extent threshold produces an actual FDR of 0.05 with relatively common imaging parameters). We recommend a greater focus on replication and meta-analysis rather than emphasizing single studies as the unit of analysis for establishing scientific truth. From this perspective, Type I errors are self-erasing because they will not replicate, thus allowing for more lenient thresholding to avoid Type II errors.