Fig. 3: SUBGROUP*STATE differences in behavior and functional connectivity (PFT-regressed fMRI).
From: Not all smokers are alike: the hidden cost of sustained attention during nicotine abstinence
A There was no difference between the HTP and LTP SUBGROUPs for the total score of the subjective WSWS (p = 0.29). B Across all demand conditions, HTPs (vs. LTPs) show a greater increase (Kruskall–Wallis chi-squared = 5.4741, p = 0.01) in the number of Errors of Omission (EOm) during abstinence; HTP: W = 378, p = 8.76e-06, LTP: W = 432, p = 9.47e-4. C Dyad1 with the L Precentral seed (L Pre, red) and the R vent Insula “target” (RvI, blue) and dyad2 with the L pos Insula seed (LpI, red) and the R mid Occipital “target” (RmO, blue). A “target” in our analysis was defined as a significant cluster arising from a whole-brain seed-based FC analysis. The solid arrows indicate within-dyad FC while the dotted arrows indicate between-dyad FC. The arrows for seed- “target” and dyad-dyad FC show do not imply directionality or causality. D Z-scored FC averages showing increased FC during nicotine abstinence (red bars, SUBGROUP*STATE interaction) within dyad1 (left, LPre↔RvI) and dyad2 (right, LpI↔RmO). Error bars show standard error of the mean. Please see Supplemental Table ST4 for “seed” and “target” MNI coordinates. HTP High Task Performers, LTP Low Task Performers, WSWS Wisconsin Smoking Withdrawal Scale, L Pre Left Precentral gyrus, RvI Right ventral Insula, LpI Left posterior Insula, RmO Right middle Occipital, MNI Montreal Neurological Institute.
