Hi Alfonso,

I have moved to the second-level with this project and it is slightly modified from my previous post here. I have a question about interpreting the directionality of my ROI-to-ROI results. Here is the new design:
6 runs per subject (341 volumes each), 12 conditions, in a 2 (2-back, 0-back) by 3 (pre-, during, post-stimulation) by 2 (active stim vs sham) design (2x2x3).

To understand my labeling:
Ba = pre active
Da = during active
Pa = post active
Bs = pre sham
Ds = during sham
Ps = post sham

In the image attached, I have defined my contrast as 1 -1 1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (selecting 2-back_Ba, 0-back_Ba, 2-Back_Da, and 0-Back_Da in this contrast).

My question: in the attached image, seed 5 has significantly increased connectivity to targets 13, 7, and 6. With this contrast, I am interpreting this to mean: connectivity is increased during active stimulation for 2>0 relative to baseline active 2>0. Is this correct? Or does this result mean: Increased connectivity is occurring in the baseline active condition relative to during active stimulation?

If I select another contrast instead, for example: 0 0 1 -1 0 0 0 0 1 -1 0 0 , and had significant connectivity results, would this mean for 2>0 during active is increased relative to during sham?
I am unclear about the ordering of the different conditions in terms of interpreting the directionality of significant results.


Any help with this would be greatly appreciated!


Best regards,
Nicole