Table 4.
Left | Right | |
---|---|---|
a. Whole STS | ||
Speech–angry | 78.13 (65.63) | 65.63 (62.50) |
Speech–happy | 62.50 (62.50) | 71.88 (62.50) |
Gaze–speech | 68.75 (65.63) | 81.25 (64.06) |
Gaze–angry | 75.00 (65.63) | 68.75 (62.50) |
Gaze–happy | 65.63 (62.50) | 68.75 (65.63) |
Angry–happy | 56.25 (62.50) | 53.13 (62.50) |
Emo–non-Emo | 62.50 (62.50) | 56.25 (62.50) |
Eyes–mouth | 68.75 (62.50) | 71.88 (62.50) |
b. pSTS | ||
Speech–angry | 62.50 (62.50) | 43.75 (62.50) |
Speech–happy | 46.87 (65.63) | 62.50 (62.50) |
Gaze–speech | 43.75 (65.63) | 68.75 (65.63) |
Gaze–angry | 75.00 (65.63) | 71.88 (62.50) |
Gaze–happy | 50.00 (65.63) | 68.75 (65.63) |
Angry–happy | 65.62 (62.50) | 65.62 (62.50) |
Emo–non-Emo | 53.13 (65.63) | 59.37 (65.63) |
Eyes–mouth | 50.00 (62.50) | 46.87 (62.50) |
Notes: Values represent the mean accuracy of pairwise classifications, together with significance cutoffs reported in brackets. Results are shown for the (a) whole anatomical STS mask and (b) the pSTS functional ROI defined by a separate face localizer. Classification performances were significantly better than chance are marked in bold.