001032015 001__ 1032015
001032015 005__ 20250912110144.0
001032015 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1162/imag_a_00358
001032015 0247_ $$2datacite_doi$$a10.34734/FZJ-2024-05930
001032015 0247_ $$2pmid$$a40800475
001032015 0247_ $$2WOS$$aWOS:001530597300003
001032015 037__ $$aFZJ-2024-05930
001032015 082__ $$a050
001032015 1001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)180212$$aKüppers, Vincent$$b0$$eCorresponding author$$ufzj
001032015 245__ $$aConsistent activation differences versus differences in consistent activation: Evaluating meta-analytic contrasts
001032015 260__ $$aCambridge, MA$$bMIT Press$$c2024
001032015 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
001032015 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
001032015 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1737102540_6866
001032015 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
001032015 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
001032015 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
001032015 520__ $$aMeta-analytic contrasts are a promising aspect of coordinate-based meta-analyses in neuroimaging research as they facilitate the statistical comparison of two meta-analytic results. They have been used for a multitude of comparisons, such as task conditions, cognitive processes, and groups. However, it remains to be tested how the results of meta-analytic contrasts relate to those of classic meta-analyses and vice versa. Here we present a comprehensive empirical investigation of this issue using four datasets from three different cognitive domains: working memory, working memory load, cognitive interference processing, and emotional face processing. For all four datasets, we compared the results of a standard meta-analysis across prototypical contrasts (condition A > condition B) reported in individual experiments with those of a contrast between two individual meta-analyses of the same conditions (meta-analysis condition A > meta-analysis condition B). In the meta-analytic contrasts similar brain regions as in the standard meta-analysis were found but with relatively distinct spatial activation patterns. Additionally, fewer regions were revealed in the meta-analytic contrasts, especially in areas where the conditions spatially overlapped. This can be ascribed to the loss of information on the strength of activations in meta-analytic contrasts, across which standard meta-analysis summarize. In one dataset, additional regions were found in the meta-analytic contrast, potentially due to task effects. Our results demonstrate that meta-analytic contrasts can yield similar results to standard meta-analyses but are sparser. This confirms the overall validity, but also limited ability to capture all regions found in standard meta-analyses. Notable differences observed in some cases indicate that such contrasts cannot be taken as an easy substitute for classic meta-analyses of experiment-level contrasts, warranting further research into the boundary conditions for agreement.
001032015 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251$$a5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability (POF4-525)$$cPOF4-525$$fPOF IV$$x0
001032015 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, Journals: juser.fz-juelich.de
001032015 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131855$$aCieslik, Edna$$b1$$ufzj
001032015 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)185961$$aFrahm, Lennart$$b2$$ufzj
001032015 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131684$$aHoffstaedter, Felix$$b3$$ufzj
001032015 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$aEickhoff, Simon$$b4$$ufzj
001032015 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131693$$aLangner, Robert$$b5$$ufzj
001032015 7001_ $$0P:(DE-Juel1)131699$$aMüller, Veronika$$b6$$eCorresponding author$$ufzj
001032015 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)3167925-0$$a10.1162/imag_a_00358$$p1-16$$tImaging neuroscience$$v2$$x2837-6056$$y2024
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/APC600589773.pdf
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/APC600589773.gif?subformat=icon$$xicon
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/APC600589773.jpg?subformat=icon-1440$$xicon-1440
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/APC600589773.jpg?subformat=icon-180$$xicon-180
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/APC600589773.jpg?subformat=icon-640$$xicon-640
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/imag_a_00358-2.pdf$$yOpenAccess
001032015 8564_ $$uhttps://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1032015/files/imag_a_00358.pdf$$yOpenAccess
001032015 8767_ $$8APC600589773$$92024-10-23$$a1200207939$$d2024-10-30$$eAPC$$jZahlung erfolgt$$z1.600 USD
001032015 909CO $$ooai:juser.fz-juelich.de:1032015$$pdnbdelivery$$popenCost$$pVDB$$pdriver$$pOpenAPC$$popen_access$$popenaire
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)180212$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b0$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-Juel1)180212$$a Uni Köln$$b0
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131855$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b1$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131855$$a HHU Düsseldorf$$b1
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)185961$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b2$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)36225-6$$6P:(DE-Juel1)185961$$aRWTH Aachen$$b2$$kRWTH
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131684$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b3$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b4$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131678$$a HHU Düsseldorf$$b4
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131693$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b5$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131693$$a HHU Düsseldorf$$b5
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)5008462-8$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131699$$aForschungszentrum Jülich$$b6$$kFZJ
001032015 9101_ $$0I:(DE-HGF)0$$6P:(DE-Juel1)131699$$a HHU Düsseldorf$$b6
001032015 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF4-520$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF4-500$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF4$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$9G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251$$aDE-HGF$$bKey Technologies$$lNatural, Artificial and Cognitive Information Processing$$vDecoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction$$x0
001032015 9141_ $$y2024
001032015 915pc $$0PC:(DE-HGF)0000$$2APC$$aAPC keys set
001032015 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0510$$2StatID$$aOpenAccess
001032015 915__ $$0LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBY4$$2HGFVOC$$aCreative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0
001032015 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline$$d2025-01-02
001032015 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0501$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ Seal$$d2024-09-26T09:40:26Z
001032015 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0500$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bDOAJ$$d2024-09-26T09:40:26Z
001032015 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bDOAJ : Anonymous peer review$$d2024-09-26T09:40:26Z
001032015 9201_ $$0I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406$$kINM-7$$lGehirn & Verhalten$$x0
001032015 980__ $$ajournal
001032015 980__ $$aVDB
001032015 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED
001032015 980__ $$aI:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406
001032015 980__ $$aAPC
001032015 9801_ $$aAPC
001032015 9801_ $$aFullTexts