scholarly journals Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates

2016 ◽  
Vol 113 (28) ◽  
pp. 7900-7905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anders Eklund ◽  
Thomas E. Nichols ◽  
Hans Knutsson

The most widely used task functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analyses use parametric statistical methods that depend on a variety of assumptions. In this work, we use real resting-state data and a total of 3 million random task group analyses to compute empirical familywise error rates for the fMRI software packages SPM, FSL, and AFNI, as well as a nonparametric permutation method. For a nominal familywise error rate of 5%, the parametric statistical methods are shown to be conservative for voxelwise inference and invalid for clusterwise inference. Our results suggest that the principal cause of the invalid cluster inferences is spatial autocorrelation functions that do not follow the assumed Gaussian shape. By comparison, the nonparametric permutation test is found to produce nominal results for voxelwise as well as clusterwise inference. These findings speak to the need of validating the statistical methods being used in the field of neuroimaging.

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 5544-5559 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan D Power ◽  
Charles J Lynch ◽  
Babatunde Adeyemo ◽  
Steven E Petersen

Abstract This article advances two parallel lines of argument about resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) signals, one empirical and one conceptual. The empirical line creates a four-part organization of the text: (1) head motion and respiration commonly cause distinct, major, unwanted influences (artifacts) in fMRI signals; (2) head motion and respiratory changes are, confoundingly, both related to psychological and clinical and biological variables of interest; (3) many fMRI denoising strategies fail to identify and remove one or the other kind of artifact; and (4) unremoved artifact, due to correlations of artifacts with variables of interest, renders studies susceptible to identifying variance of noninterest as variance of interest. Arising from these empirical observations is a conceptual argument: that an event-related approach to task-free scans, targeting common behaviors during scanning, enables fundamental distinctions among the kinds of signals present in the data, information which is vital to understanding the effects of denoising procedures. This event-related perspective permits statements like “Event X is associated with signals A, B, and C, each with particular spatial, temporal, and signal decay properties”. Denoising approaches can then be tailored, via performance in known events, to permit or suppress certain kinds of signals based on their desirability.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document