TABLE 2.

Analysis of variance results within search region of interest demonstrating a main effect of Condition (A) and an interaction of Group (CW, RBN) by Condition (Hungry, Fed) in response to tastant (B). Coordinates are reported for the center of mass. L: left; R: right; CW: healthy comparison women; RBN: women remitted from bulimia nervosa. Small volume correction was determined with Monte-Carlo simulations (via AFNI’s 3dClustSim) to guard against false positives. Post-hoc analyses were conducted using glht from the multcomp package in R to test general linear hypotheses using Tukey’s all-pair comparisons.

(A) Main effect of Visit
ROI	R/L	Volume (voxels)	x	y	z	F	η2	Post-hoc Comparisons
								Contrast	z	p
Putamen	L	119	23	−5	−6	18.67	0.01	Hungry > Fed	4.10	< 0.001
Amygdala	L	56	19	3	−18	11.64	0.02	Hungry > Fed	4.65	< 0.001
Medial Frontal Gy	L	54	2	−26	−19	13.99	0.01	Fed > Hungry	2.54	0.01
Putamen	R	48	−22	−9	−1	10.03	0.01	Hungry > Fed	3.14	< 0.001
(B) Group x Condition Interaction
ROI	R/L	Volume (voxels)	x	y	z	F	η2	Post-hoc Comparisons
								Contrast	z	p
Putamen	L	47.00	23	−7	−8	11.95	0.01	CW Hungry > CW Fed	4.60	< 0.001
Insula	L	42.00	31	−2	9	14.35	0.02	ns
Amygdala	L	34.00	18	4	−16	10.84	0.02	CW Hungry > CW Fed	4.43	< 0.001
								RBN Fed > CW Fed	2.63	0.05