Skip to main content
. 2003 Feb 11;18(3):215–221. doi: 10.1002/hbm.10096

Table III.

ROIs analyses for high‐ and low‐frequency words, as a function of exposure duration

Exposure duration Word frequency Fusiform gyrus Inferior prefrontal Inferior parietal Posterior temporal Cerebellum
LHa, c RHb, c LH RHb, c LHa, c RHa, c LHa, c RHc LHa, c RHc
Long High 12.20 11.88 13.62 14.47 11.53 15.73 10.92 13.52 11.58 11.58
(82.3) (60.1) (93.6) (64.0) (146.3) (115.7) (107.0) (67.4) (514.8) (378.3)
Low 15.34 13.38 14.99 18.47 15.14 18.89 13.67 16.78 13.67 13.43
(60.0) (63.9) (105.6) (92.4) (140.1) (134.8) (103.3) (94.9) (443.8) (422.0)
Short High 22.95 23.51 21.40 28.00 16.34 20.62 15.36 18.19 15.78 21.32
(153.1) (180.0) (255.1) (220.9) (275.2) (334.9) (211.0) (238.2) (780.0) (819.7)
Low 1.18 1.97 7.52 7.09 4.38 5.8 4.14 5.32 3.94 4.61
(41.0) (40.9) (73.2) (76.2) (92) (91.2) (69.9) (69.3) (332.6) (343.1)

We chose five regions in each hemisphere as our ROIs. For each region of interest, individual regional magnitude values were computed for each of a set of individual correlational images. These regional magnitude values were then submitted to standard statistical analysis. The first number in each unit is the average magnitude of “intensity” in each ROI across subjects, which indicates the level of functional activity; the number in parentheses is the average number of “active” voxels that satisfy the significance criterion (i.e., F > 3.9) in each ROI.

a

Significant (P < 0.05) exposure duration effect in low‐frequency words.

b

Marginally significant (P = 0.051) exposure duration effect in low‐frequency words.

c

Significant (P < 0.05) frequency effect in the 51‐msec‐exposure duration condition.