Table II.

SEM results

	Task condition (DMS)			Control condition (PV)
	Eff. conn.	S. E.	t‐value (P)	Eff. conn.	S. E.	t‐value (P)
V1→V4	0.48	0.04	13.8 (<0.001)	0.49	0.04	13.4 (<0.001)
V4→IT	0.8	0.03	25.6 (<0.001)	0.75	0.03	23.6 (<0.001)
IT→V4	0.35	0.04	8.18 (<0.001)	0.43	0.04	9.84 (<0.001)
IT→FS	0.96	0.02	54.6 (<0.001)	0.92	0.03	27.5 (<0.001)
FS→D1	0.03	0.08	0.35 (0.73)	0.12	0.22	0.56 (0.58)
FS→D2	0.03	0.1	0.27 (0.79)	0.23	0.15	1.58 (0.12)
FS→FR	0.39	0.04	9.5 (<0.001)	0.65	0.11	5.68 (<0.001)
D1→IT	0.02	0.07	0.25 (0.8)	0.12	0.05	2.32 (<0.001)
D1→FS	0.03	0.02	1.65 (0.1)	0.02	0.04	0.48 (0.63)
D1→D2	0.43	0.11	3.99 (<0.001)	0.48	0.1	4.78 (<0.001)
D1→FR	0.56	0.07	8.48 (<0.001)	0.17	0.26	0.67 (0.5)
D2→V4	0.27	0.04	6.24 (<0.001)	0.08	0.04	1.76 (0.08)
D2→IT	0.13	0.07	1.88 (0.06)	0.1	0.05	1.96 (0.05)
D2→D1	0.57	0.11	5.22 (<0.001)	0.39	0.11	3.41 (<0.001)
FR→D1	0.16	0.13	1.23 (0.22)	0.18	0.31	0.58 (0.56)
FR→D2	0.2	0.15	1.39 (0.17)	−0.09	0.15	−0.59 (0.56)

The estimated effective connectivity parameters with standard errors, and their t‐values (P‐values). Effective connectivity parameters were estimated by an iteration procedure minimizing the maximum likelihood function used in LISREL software. Bold indicates the links that were significantly different from zero at P < 0.05.