<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=178135"><dc:title>The contribution of temporal information in the computation of brain functional connectivity when assessing its association with interpersonal differences in behaviour</dc:title><dc:creator>Matkovič,	Andraž	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Repovš,	Grega	(Mentor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Šubelj,	Lovro	(Komentor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>functional connectivity</dc:subject><dc:subject>brain-behavior associations</dc:subject><dc:subject>dynamic functional connectivity</dc:subject><dc:subject>temporal variability</dc:subject><dc:subject>canonical correlation analysis</dc:subject><dc:subject>brain</dc:subject><dc:description>Functional connectivity (FC) refers to the statistical associations of time series between signals
from different brain regions. We investigated the role of temporal information in FC
computation for understanding brain-behavior associations and improving the generalizability
of such associations. Two aspects of temporal information in FC computation were
considered: sensitivity to the temporal order and variability of FC estimates over time. We
examined both aspects in two studies.
The first study compared FC methods that differ in their sensitivity to the temporal order
(static vs. dynamic) and the number of regions considered when estimating a single
edge (bivariate vs. multivariate). Similarities between FC matrices, node centrality measures,
and patterns of brain-behavior associations were assessed. Although FC estimates did not
differ as a function of sensitivity to temporal order, we observed differences between the
multivariate and bivariate FC methods. We conclude that dynamic FC estimates represent
information that is largely similar to that of static FC.
In the second study, we examined the between-subject and within-subject variability of
FC estimates. We hypothesized that brain features with higher between-subject variability
and lower within-subject variability would be more informative about brain-behavior associations
than other features. We showed that FC edges varying across subjects were primarily
located in associative networks, whereas FC edges varying across time were located in unimodal
networks. Resting-state FC was predominantly influenced by stable individual factors,
whereas time-scale variation was smaller and more subject-specific. We used canonical correlation
analysis to examine brain-behavior associations. Although models based on edges
with low within-subject and high between-subject variability performed similarly to models
based on all edges, edges with higher between-subject variability were generally more informative
than edges with lower between-subject variability.
Our research highlights the importance of carefully considering multiple factors throughout
the analysis pipeline when investigating brain-behavior associations.</dc:description><dc:publisher>A. Matkovič</dc:publisher><dc:date>2024</dc:date><dc:date>2026-01-19 15:02:43</dc:date><dc:type>Doktorsko delo/naloga</dc:type><dc:identifier>178135</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
