Hello CONN Users,

I have a question about my second level results and want to be sure I am interpreting the significant ROI-to-ROI results correctly. I have included a screenshot of my results.

Background on the study design: 16 subjects, 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). gPPI analysis for ROI-to-ROI results. I added my own ROIs which are labeled 1-15 and correspond to the working memory network.
Brief description of the study: within group design, participants came in for two separate visits (one active stimulation, one sham stimulation inside the scanner during 3 runs of an  N-back task, baseline, during, and post-stimulation, thus they have 6 conditions, 3 for active and 3 for sham)

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: 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,
Nicole