Table 2.

Functional connectivity differences between the two NAc subdivisionsa

ROIResting stateGamblingThermal painbp
pcorepshellpcorepshellpcorepshell
AMYG0.11 ± 0.020.12 ± 0.020.07 ± 0.020.10 ± 0.020.05 ± 0.020.12 ± 0.02<0.05
BG0.21 ± 0.020.10 ± 0.010.16 ± 0.030.08 ± 0.020.15 ± 0.020.12 ± 0.02<0.001
CG0.13 ± 0.020.07 ± 0.020.05 ± 0.030.02 ± 0.030.06 ± 0.030.03 ± 0.03<0.001
FP0.11 ± 0.020.07 ± 0.020.09 ± 0.020.02 ± 0.020.06 ± 0.020.02 ± 0.02<0.001
HIP0.04 ± 0.010.06 ± 0.010.04 ± 0.020.06 ± 0.020.01 ± 0.020.06 ± 0.03NS
INS0.08 ± 0.020.02 ± 0.020.05 ± 0.030.01 ± 0.030.05 ± 0.030.01 ± 0.03<0.001
OFC0.28 ± 0.040.37 ± 0.040.09 ± 0.050.23 ± 0.050.13 ± 0.050.27 ± 0.05<0.001
PCG0.15 ± 0.030.09 ± 0.020.08 ± 0.030.02 ± 0.030.09 ± 0.030.05 ± 0.03<0.001
SCC0.26 ± 0.030.33 ± 0.020.12 ± 0.040.23 ± 0.030.16 ± 0.030.30 ± 0.03<0.001
TH0.12 ± 0.020.06 ± 0.020.10 ± 0.030.08 ± 0.020.09 ± 0.020.05 ± 0.02<0.001
  • aData are mean ± SEM; parametric estimates between seed regions (pcore or pshell) and 10 target regions. Differences in connectivity across tasks (resting state, gambling, and thermal pain) and NAc subdivision (pcore and pshell) and target ROIs were performed using a three-way ANOVA.

  • bDifferences in functional connectivity between pcore and pshell to each ROI across all tasks using a post hoc Tukey test.

  • NS, Not significant.