Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Pain. 2015 Jun 25;16(9):913–925. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.05.013

Table 5.

Group × Emotion Interactionsa in Brain Regions of Significant BOLD Activity Differences between FH+Pain and FH−Pain Youth

Peak Anatomic Location Group × Emotion Interactions
FH+Pain vs. FH−Pain F(1,14) MSE p partial η2
  Go: Happy < Calm
Left Fusiform Gyrus 19.56 .006 .001 .583
Right Fusiform Gyrus 14.32 .022 .002 .506
Right IPL 25.72 .006 .00017 .648
Right Cuneus 11.15 .017 .005 .443
Left Uncus 12.08 .025 .004 .463
Right Culmen 27.55 .004 .00012 .663
Right IFG 14.13 .016 .002 .502
Right Thalamus 18.64 .006 .001 .571
Left Precuneus 9.92 .032 .009 .397
Right PHG 11.42 .009 .004 .449
  Go: Scared < Calm
Left SFG 14.13 .074 .002 .502
Left PCC 17.06 .007 .001 .549
Right Precuneus 10.31 .005 .006 .424
Right Declive 11.40 .028 .005 .449
Right SFG 10.96 .004 .005 .439
 Calm NoGo: Happy < Calm
Right Postcentral Gyrus 11.21 .017 .005 .445
Right IFG 8.55 .039 .011 .379
 Calm NoGo: Scared > Calm
Right MTG 19.39 .004 .001 .581
Right Cingulate Gyrus 10.83 .006 .005 .436
a

These interactions were extracted from mixed model analyses of variance (ANOVAs) in which “Group” was the between-subjects factor, and “Emotion” (Happy, Scared, Calm) vs. baseline brain response were the within-subjects factors. The ANOVAs were conducted to examine which of the emotional conditions vs. baseline were driving the significant group differences in the contrasts of interest. In all of these clusters, a significant interaction between Group and Emotion emerged.