Hello, 

Thanks again for developing this great software and providing easy-to-follow tutorials alongside it. 

I'm using SDM-Psi v6.21, and I'm concerned about the extent of the spread of the activations the meta-analysis produces - especially as the network involved in these studies is very well outlined thus far and is usually to a much less extent as SDM suggests, with some extra regions being shown by SDM that usually haven't survived single studies nor other meta-analyses (albeit using different meta-analytic software, e.g. GingerALE). I've attached some photos (on this post and replied posts) of the extensive activations I'm talking about, with a strict threshold of tfce-corrected p .0001. From your experience, would you say the extent of these activations is unusual, or could this be a valid result? 

It's my first time using this software, so I'm concerned I've made an error that may contribute to the extensive activations - is it possible to have these results verified somehow? I'm happy to send on the input data and other needed details if possible. 

(In response to a previous forum post re large activation clusters, I've reduced the FWHM at pre-processing from 20 to 10 - but this did not limit the size/spread of the activations by much) 

Best wishes, 
Molly

second image

third image

Any advice, from anyone experiencing similar widespread activation concerns?