NEUROSCIENCE Correction for “Perceiving social interactions in the posterior superior temporal sulcus,” by Leyla Isik, Kami Koldewyn, David Beeler, and Nancy Kanwisher, which was first published October 9, 2017; 10.1073/pnas.1714471114 (Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114:E9145–E9152).
The authors note that, due to a printer’s error, the legends for Figs. 3, 4, and 5 appeared incorrectly. Specifically, the legend intended for Fig. 3 appeared with Fig. 5, the legend for Fig. 4 appeared with Fig. 3, and the legend for Fig. 5 appeared with Fig. 4. The three figures appear below with their corrected legends.
Fig. 3.
fROI responses to experiment 1 stimuli. Shown are the average beta values (mean ± SEM) across subjects in each individually defined fROI (A, SI-fROI; B, TPJ; C, pSTS face; D, MT) for each condition from the three fROI-defining contrasts: point light walkers interacting vs. independent (experiment 1), false belief vs. false photo stories (standard theory of mind localizer), and faces vs. objects. All beta values are calculated from a held-out localizer run that was not used to define the fROI. *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01; ***P ≤ 0.001; ns, not significant, P > 0.05.
Fig. 4.
fROI responses to experiment 2 shape stimuli. Shown are the average beta values (mean ± SEM) across subjects in each individually defined fROI (A, SI-fROI; B, TPJ; C, pSTS face; D, MT) for the first 6 s of the help, hinder, physical interaction, and animate videos. *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01; ***P ≤ 0.001; ****P ≤ 0.0001; ns, not significant, P > 0.05.
Fig. 5.
Decoding helping vs. hindering conditions. Shown is the average classifier accuracy (mean ± SEM) across subjects in each fROI for decoding help vs. hinder. A linear SVM classifier was trained on the beta values from nine pairs of videos in each individual subject’s fROIs and tested on the tenth held-out pair. *P ≤ 0.05; **P ≤ 0.01; ***P ≤ 0.001; ****P ≤ 0.0001; ns, not significant, P > 0.05.