66 Chapter 3 Figure 3.3 Association between CEM and the percentage of dwell time within the eye region of targets relative to the total video duration for each gaze direction (i.e., direct versus averted gaze) during videos of self and an unfamiliar other. There was no significant interaction between CEM and gaze direction (p = .906) or CEM and target (p = .168) on the percentage of dwell time within the eye region of targets. Neuroimaging results To test for associations between CEM and neural responses to direct minus averted gaze of the self and an unfamiliar other, we performed two separate whole-brain regression analyses with participants’ experienced CEM scores as covariate of interest and their neural responses to direct gaze from either the self or unfamiliar other (Δdirect–averted gaze) as outcome variable. In response to participants’ own direct gaze, a significant positive association was found in the vmPFC (MNI-coordinate (14, 48, -8), Z = 3.98, k = 771, pFWE-corrected = .032 at cluster level), indicating that participants who reported more CEM showed enhanced BOLD-activation in vmPFC in response to their own direct versus averted gaze (Figure 3.4). In response to the gaze of an unfamiliar other person, we found no significant association between CEM and neural responses to direct (versus averted gaze). See Supplement S3.5 for main effect of target on participants’ neural responses during the task at whole-brain level. There was no main effect of gaze direction at the neural level.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw