How Representative are Neuroimaging Samples? Large-Scale Evidence for Trait Anxiety Differences Between fMRI and Behaviour-Only Research Participants

Caroline Charpentier; Paul Faulkner; Eva Pool; Verena Ly; Marieke Tollenaar; Lisa Kluen; Aniek Fransen; Yumeya Yamamori; Niall Lally; Anahit Mkrtchian; Vincent Valton; Quentin J M Huys; Ioannis Sarigiannidis; Kelly Morrow; Valentina Krenz; Felix Kalbe; Anna Cremer; Gundula Zerbes; Franziska Kausche; Nadine Wanke; Alessio Giarrizzo; Erdem Pulcu; Susanna Murphy; Alexander Kaltenboeck; Michael Browning; Lynn Paul; Roshan Cools; Karin Roelofs; Luiz Pessoa; Catherine Harmer; Henry Chase; Christine Grillon; Lars Schwabe; Jonathan Roiser; Oliver Robinson; John O'Doherty

doi:10.1093/scan/nsab057

How Representative are Neuroimaging Samples? Large-Scale Evidence for Trait Anxiety Differences Between fMRI and Behaviour-Only Research Participants

Caroline Charpentier, Paul Faulkner, Eva Pool, Verena Ly, Marieke Tollenaar, Lisa Kluen, Aniek Fransen, Yumeya Yamamori, Niall Lally, Anahit Mkrtchian, Vincent Valton, Quentin J M Huys, Ioannis Sarigiannidis, Kelly Morrow, Valentina Krenz, Felix Kalbe, Anna Cremer, Gundula Zerbes, Franziska Kausche, Nadine WankeAlessio Giarrizzo, Erdem Pulcu, Susanna Murphy, Alexander Kaltenboeck, Michael Browning, Lynn Paul, Roshan Cools, Karin Roelofs, Luiz Pessoa, Catherine Harmer, Henry Chase, Christine Grillon, Lars Schwabe, Jonathan Roiser, Oliver Robinson, John O'Doherty

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Over the past three decades, functional MRI (fMRI) has become key to study how cognitive processes are implemented in the human brain. However, the question of whether participants recruited into fMRI studies differ from participants recruited into other study contexts has received little to no attention. This is particularly pertinent when effects fail to generalize across study contexts: for example, a behavioural effect discovered in a non-imaging context not replicating in a neuroimaging environment. Here, we tested the hypothesis, motivated by preliminary findings (n = 272), that fMRI participants differ from behaviour-only participants on one fundamental individual difference variable: trait anxiety. Analysing trait anxiety scores and possible confounding variables from healthy volunteers across multiple institutions (n = 3317), we found robust support for lower trait anxiety in fMRI study participants, consistent with a sampling or self-selection bias. The bias was larger in studies that relied on phone screening (compared to full in-person psychiatric screening), recruited at least partly from convenience samples (compared to community samples), and in pharmacology studies. Our findings highlight the need for surveying trait anxiety at recruitment and for appropriate screening procedures or sampling strategies to mitigate this bias.

Original language	English
Journal	SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsab057
Publication status	Published - 5 May 2021

Access to Document

10.1093/scan/nsab057Licence: CC BY

https://academic.oup.com/scan/advance-article/doi/10.1093/scan/nsab057/6265319Licence: CC BY

Cite this

Charpentier, C., Faulkner, P., Pool, E., Ly, V., Tollenaar, M., Kluen, L., Fransen, A., Yamamori, Y., Lally, N., Mkrtchian, A., Valton, V., Huys, Q. J. M., Sarigiannidis, I., Morrow, K., Krenz, V., Kalbe, F., Cremer, A., Zerbes, G., Kausche, F., ... O'Doherty, J. (2021). How Representative are Neuroimaging Samples? Large-Scale Evidence for Trait Anxiety Differences Between fMRI and Behaviour-Only Research Participants. SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsab057

@article{7856b13a8a194f92892d7a0b2798bd83,

title = "How Representative are Neuroimaging Samples? Large-Scale Evidence for Trait Anxiety Differences Between fMRI and Behaviour-Only Research Participants",

abstract = "Over the past three decades, functional MRI (fMRI) has become key to study how cognitive processes are implemented in the human brain. However, the question of whether participants recruited into fMRI studies differ from participants recruited into other study contexts has received little to no attention. This is particularly pertinent when effects fail to generalize across study contexts: for example, a behavioural effect discovered in a non-imaging context not replicating in a neuroimaging environment. Here, we tested the hypothesis, motivated by preliminary findings (n = 272), that fMRI participants differ from behaviour-only participants on one fundamental individual difference variable: trait anxiety. Analysing trait anxiety scores and possible confounding variables from healthy volunteers across multiple institutions (n = 3317), we found robust support for lower trait anxiety in fMRI study participants, consistent with a sampling or self-selection bias. The bias was larger in studies that relied on phone screening (compared to full in-person psychiatric screening), recruited at least partly from convenience samples (compared to community samples), and in pharmacology studies. Our findings highlight the need for surveying trait anxiety at recruitment and for appropriate screening procedures or sampling strategies to mitigate this bias.",

author = "Caroline Charpentier and Paul Faulkner and Eva Pool and Verena Ly and Marieke Tollenaar and Lisa Kluen and Aniek Fransen and Yumeya Yamamori and Niall Lally and Anahit Mkrtchian and Vincent Valton and Huys, {Quentin J M} and Ioannis Sarigiannidis and Kelly Morrow and Valentina Krenz and Felix Kalbe and Anna Cremer and Gundula Zerbes and Franziska Kausche and Nadine Wanke and Alessio Giarrizzo and Erdem Pulcu and Susanna Murphy and Alexander Kaltenboeck and Michael Browning and Lynn Paul and Roshan Cools and Karin Roelofs and Luiz Pessoa and Catherine Harmer and Henry Chase and Christine Grillon and Lars Schwabe and Jonathan Roiser and Oliver Robinson and John O'Doherty",

year = "2021",

month = may,

day = "5",

doi = "10.1093/scan/nsab057",

language = "English",

journal = "SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE",

issn = "1749-5016",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

Charpentier, C, Faulkner, P, Pool, E, Ly, V, Tollenaar, M, Kluen, L, Fransen, A, Yamamori, Y, Lally, N, Mkrtchian, A, Valton, V, Huys, QJM, Sarigiannidis, I, Morrow, K, Krenz, V, Kalbe, F, Cremer, A, Zerbes, G, Kausche, F, Wanke, N, Giarrizzo, A, Pulcu, E, Murphy, S, Kaltenboeck, A, Browning, M, Paul, L, Cools, R, Roelofs, K, Pessoa, L, Harmer, C, Chase, H, Grillon, C, Schwabe, L, Roiser, J, Robinson, O & O'Doherty, J 2021, 'How Representative are Neuroimaging Samples? Large-Scale Evidence for Trait Anxiety Differences Between fMRI and Behaviour-Only Research Participants', SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsab057

TY - JOUR

T1 - How Representative are Neuroimaging Samples? Large-Scale Evidence for Trait Anxiety Differences Between fMRI and Behaviour-Only Research Participants

AU - Charpentier, Caroline

AU - Faulkner, Paul

AU - Pool, Eva

AU - Ly, Verena

AU - Tollenaar, Marieke

AU - Kluen, Lisa

AU - Fransen, Aniek

AU - Yamamori, Yumeya

AU - Lally, Niall

AU - Mkrtchian, Anahit

AU - Valton, Vincent

AU - Huys, Quentin J M

AU - Sarigiannidis, Ioannis

AU - Morrow, Kelly

AU - Krenz, Valentina

AU - Kalbe, Felix

AU - Cremer, Anna

AU - Zerbes, Gundula

AU - Kausche, Franziska

AU - Wanke, Nadine

AU - Giarrizzo, Alessio

AU - Pulcu, Erdem

AU - Murphy, Susanna

AU - Kaltenboeck, Alexander

AU - Browning, Michael

AU - Paul, Lynn

AU - Cools, Roshan

AU - Roelofs, Karin

AU - Pessoa, Luiz

AU - Harmer, Catherine

AU - Chase, Henry

AU - Grillon, Christine

AU - Schwabe, Lars

AU - Roiser, Jonathan

AU - Robinson, Oliver

AU - O'Doherty, John

PY - 2021/5/5

Y1 - 2021/5/5

N2 - Over the past three decades, functional MRI (fMRI) has become key to study how cognitive processes are implemented in the human brain. However, the question of whether participants recruited into fMRI studies differ from participants recruited into other study contexts has received little to no attention. This is particularly pertinent when effects fail to generalize across study contexts: for example, a behavioural effect discovered in a non-imaging context not replicating in a neuroimaging environment. Here, we tested the hypothesis, motivated by preliminary findings (n = 272), that fMRI participants differ from behaviour-only participants on one fundamental individual difference variable: trait anxiety. Analysing trait anxiety scores and possible confounding variables from healthy volunteers across multiple institutions (n = 3317), we found robust support for lower trait anxiety in fMRI study participants, consistent with a sampling or self-selection bias. The bias was larger in studies that relied on phone screening (compared to full in-person psychiatric screening), recruited at least partly from convenience samples (compared to community samples), and in pharmacology studies. Our findings highlight the need for surveying trait anxiety at recruitment and for appropriate screening procedures or sampling strategies to mitigate this bias.

AB - Over the past three decades, functional MRI (fMRI) has become key to study how cognitive processes are implemented in the human brain. However, the question of whether participants recruited into fMRI studies differ from participants recruited into other study contexts has received little to no attention. This is particularly pertinent when effects fail to generalize across study contexts: for example, a behavioural effect discovered in a non-imaging context not replicating in a neuroimaging environment. Here, we tested the hypothesis, motivated by preliminary findings (n = 272), that fMRI participants differ from behaviour-only participants on one fundamental individual difference variable: trait anxiety. Analysing trait anxiety scores and possible confounding variables from healthy volunteers across multiple institutions (n = 3317), we found robust support for lower trait anxiety in fMRI study participants, consistent with a sampling or self-selection bias. The bias was larger in studies that relied on phone screening (compared to full in-person psychiatric screening), recruited at least partly from convenience samples (compared to community samples), and in pharmacology studies. Our findings highlight the need for surveying trait anxiety at recruitment and for appropriate screening procedures or sampling strategies to mitigate this bias.

U2 - 10.1093/scan/nsab057

DO - 10.1093/scan/nsab057

M3 - Article

SN - 1749-5016

JO - SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE

JF - SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE

ER -