Psychophysiological Interaction Analysis

In Newman. SD, et al., (2013) participant’s characteristics including age, gender, education, occupation is described. None of the participants had neurological disorder. Also, participants ‘consent to do experiments on them was gotten and approved by the Indiana University Institutional Review Board. According to Newman. SD, et al., (2013) this study is a combination of three different studies with overlapping stimuli. Each study was composed of three sessions, training, imaging and debriefing sessions. In the training session, all participants were given a Reading Span Test in order to measure their working memory capacity. Meanwhile, they were introduced to sentence comprehension experiment and were asked to complete 16 practice trials to get familiar with

Psychophysiological interactions analysis (PPI) was performed to examine whether individuals with varying working memory have different activity in brain regions. After that, partial correlation analysis was done on each pair of regions using mean signal intensity. According to Newman. SD, et al., (2013) the limitations of this study are related to default network and the use of a language comprehension task with three processing phases. No particular ethical considerations arose except for five participants who were excluded from this analysis due not having a complete dataset. In Chantel S. Prat & Marcel Adam Just (2013); however, the number of participants who took part in this study were 27 right-handed individuals including 15 male and 12 female. The participants age ranged between 18-25. Let it not remain unsaid that, 7 more participants were tested but they weren’t included in the analysis. According to Chantel S. Prat & Marcel Adam Just (2013) 60sentences were presented to participants under three different working memory conditions to test information