Figure 3.

Changing dynamics of cue-response related to outcome groups and task halves in a priori regions that had significant results from ANOVA 3×2 (Group × Halves). Results in these regions similarly the Poor outcome group (red) with a sustained response from Half1 to Half2, the Good outcome group (blue) with a decreasing response from Half1 to Half2, and the INT group (grey) decreasing but ending somewhere between the Good and Poor groups. a) A main effect of halves was found in the amygdala, with post-hoc tests revealing differences between Good vs Poor groups in Half2 and a significant decrease from Half1 to Half2 in the Good outcome group. b) A main effect of halves was found in the hippocampus, but no significant post-hoc results. c) A significant main effect of halves and a Group × Halves interaction was found in the fusiform, with post-hoc tests revealing differences between Good vs Poor groups in Half2 and a significant decrease from Half1 to Half2 in the Good outcome group. d) A main effect of halves was found in the midbrain, but no significant post-hoc results. e) A main effect of halves was found in the post-cingulate cortex (PCC), but no significant post-hoc results. f) A main effect of halves was found in the parahippocampus, with post-hoc tests revealing a significant decrease from Half1 to Half2 in the Good group and a near-significant result (p = 0.05) between Good vs Poor outcome groups in Half2. † significant interaction (FDR corrected, p < 0.05). # significant main effect of halves (FDR corrected, p < 0.05). * significant difference, post-hoc t-test (FDR corrected, p < 0.05).