Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Mass univariate testing biases the detection of interaction effects in whole-brain analysis of variance

View ORCID ProfileRobert S. Chavez, Dylan D. Wagner
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/130773
Robert S. Chavez
Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Robert S. Chavez
  • For correspondence: chavez.95@osu.edu
Dylan D. Wagner
Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Whole-brain analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a common analytic approach in cognitive neuroscience. Researchers are often interested in exploring whether brain activity reflects to the interaction of two factors. Disordinal interactions — where there is a reversal of the effect of one independent variable at a level of a second independent variable — are common in the literature. It is well established in power-analyses of factorial ANOVAs that certain patterns of interactions, such as disordinal (e.g., cross-over interactions) require less power than others to detect. This fact, combined with the perils of mass univariate testing suggests that testing for interactions in whole-brain ANOVAs, may be biased towards the detection of disordinal interactions. Here, we report on a series of simulated analysis --including whole-brain fMRI data using realistic multi-source noise parameters-- that demonstrate a bias towards the detection of disordinal interactions in mass-univariate contexts. Moreover, results of these simulations indicated that spurious disordinal interactions are found at common thresholds and cluster sizes at the group level. Moreover, simulations based on implanting true ordinal interaction effects can nevertheless appear like crossover effects at realistic levels of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) when performing mass univariate testing at the whole-brain level, potentially leading to erroneous conclusions when interpreted as is. Simulations of varying sample sizes and SNR levels show that this bias is driven primarily by SNR and larger sample sizes do little to ameliorate this issue. Together, the results of these simulations argue for caution when searching for ordinal interactions in whole-brain ANOVA.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted April 25, 2017.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Mass univariate testing biases the detection of interaction effects in whole-brain analysis of variance
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Mass univariate testing biases the detection of interaction effects in whole-brain analysis of variance
Robert S. Chavez, Dylan D. Wagner
bioRxiv 130773; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/130773
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Mass univariate testing biases the detection of interaction effects in whole-brain analysis of variance
Robert S. Chavez, Dylan D. Wagner
bioRxiv 130773; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/130773

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Neuroscience
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4228)
  • Biochemistry (9107)
  • Bioengineering (6751)
  • Bioinformatics (23944)
  • Biophysics (12089)
  • Cancer Biology (9495)
  • Cell Biology (13741)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7616)
  • Ecology (11661)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15479)
  • Genetics (10618)
  • Genomics (14296)
  • Immunology (9463)
  • Microbiology (22792)
  • Molecular Biology (9078)
  • Neuroscience (48890)
  • Paleontology (355)
  • Pathology (1479)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2565)
  • Physiology (3823)
  • Plant Biology (8308)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1467)
  • Synthetic Biology (2290)
  • Systems Biology (6172)
  • Zoology (1297)