A1) Location of the 24 individual activation foci as reported in an exemplary finger tapping experiment (Gerardin et al., 2000). A2) Summary of the 883 individual activation foci reported in all 73 experiments included in the meta-analysis (cf. Table 3),
B1) Modelled activation (MA) map resulting from centring Gaussian distributions of 7.02 mm FWHM (based on 8 subjects and estimates of 11.6 mm for EDsub and 5.7 mm for EDtemp) at the location of the foci displayed in A1. B2) Activation likelihood estimates (ALE), reflecting, for each voxel, the union of the MA maps (exemplified in B1) across all experiments.
C1) C1) Histogram of the ALE scores obtained in the permutation analysis, i.e., under the assumption of a random spatial association between studies. The values summarised in this histogram hence reflect the null-distribution against which the experimental ALE scores are compared in order to compute their respective p-values. Note, that the empirical null-distribution is sufficiently smooth even in regions of higher ALE scores to allow a reliable attribution of significance levels to the obtained experimental ALE scores, underlining the benefit of the large numbers of permutations used in their construction. C2) The clusters of significant (p < 0.05, corrected) convergence across studies, i.e., significant voxels from B2 and hence results of the performed meta-analysis, as assessed by comparison with an empirical null distribution by permutation testing (cf. C1).
All data is displayed on a surface view of the MNI single subject template.