Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2006 Nov 7.
Published in final edited form as: Neuroimage. 2005 Nov 2;29(4):1185–1191. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.09.030

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

(A) Average TUT frequency across task conditions. (B) TID values averaged across 8 ROIs for each task condition. (C) Correlation of TID and TUT values. Regression line represents best fit (R2 = 0.812). As TID magnitude increased (became more negative) across task conditions, the frequency of TUTs declined (r = 0.90, P = 0.005). Error bars in panels A and B represent standard deviation.