cortex.
I am just hesitant to believe this, as many had no control (just how someone naturally reacts to questions about their life or whatever). Also the fact that everyone was told to lie or tell the truth, so I'd be more convinced if people had a true reason to lie, or something similar. Just my two cents here.
s techniques.
This was a tough read. Definitely mostly went over my head. The conclusion helped, but I feel like this paper was more an overview for people who already knew about classification stuffs rather than an introduction for people... Could just be me, though.
various classes
So, in general, try to keep consistency and controls in the situation, so there aren't imbalances.
voxel
Can someone remind me what a voxel is? I'm struggling to understand their meaning here. The whole example in general had me confused but maybe it is because I can't follow the voxels...
it oughtto be able to predict the classes of examples it hasn't seen before
This is really interesting, as food for thought. I wonder how truly effective this is.
Classification is the analogue of regression when the variable beingpredicted is discrete, rather than continuou
This is very difficult to understand... the "introduction" to this analysis currently does not seem totally like an introduction. Does anyone get this?
series of specific choices over a series of decision points
I feel like this is very blanketing... are there really any analyses that don't follow this?
lie detection
It's interesting to think about lie detection, where scientists are not actively working to shut it down (that I know of). Compared to other faulty/potentially faulty and wrong practices, where we see outcries and people speaking out, for it to not happen here is quite interesting. Not sure if I'm articulating it well but hopefully I am!
evenwhen the regions most selectively activated by a specificclass of objects were excluded from the analysis
I'm confused by this. Are they saying that excluding the regions most activated still showed activation in the ventral temporal cortex? If so, I don't fully see the importance of this study. I feel like there must be a crucial reason for activation in that area, so simply excluding it doesn't make sense to me, or prove a point...
lesionsin one region can affect function in other regions [7
I wonder if there have been studies done with multiple lesions. I ask this simply because many mental illnesses and other diseases may affect multiple parts of the brain at once, more complex than a simple one-lesion could do. Just food for thought...
lesions to thehippocampus do not impair this function [5]
So then what is the importance? Why is it activated? There must be a reason for activation, either that they simply have not checked on, or something else. Just curious what that reason could be...