The name is absent

59

freedom, p=0.02) contralateral foot stimulation (0.21%, p=0.02) and ipsilateral foot
stimulation (0.19%, p=0.02). In order to determine the functional properties of the
STSms, we also calculated the average evoked response during the different stimulus
conditions presented in the visual and auditory block-design localizers. STSms showed a
strong response to low-contrast moving points, with a greater response to contralateral
than ipsilateral motion (Fig. 4B; 0.45% vs. 0.29%, p=0.004). STSms also responded to
static images (Fig. 4C), although significantly weaker than the response to moving points
(0.13%, p=0.03). There was no significant difference in the response to real photographs
compared with the response to scrambled photographs (0.13% for both). Auditory
stimulation produced a strong response that was equivalent in magnitude (0.41%,
p=0.4) to the strongest visual stimulus (contralateral moving points) but was
significantly greater than the response to the other visual stimuli (p=0.0004) although
these comparisons must be interpreted cautiously because auditory and visual stimuli
were presented in different scan series.

<<   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   >>

More intriguing information