Abstract
Null hypothesis significance testing is the major statistical procedure in fMRI, but provides only a rather limited picture of the effects in a data set. When sample size and power is low relying only on strict significance testing may lead to a host of false negative findings. In contrast, with very large data sets virtually every voxel might become significant. It is thus desirable to complement significance testing with procedures like inferiority and equivalence tests that allow to formally compare effect sizes within and between data sets and offer novel approaches to obtain insight into fMRI data. The major component of these tests are estimates of standardized effect sizes and their confidence intervals. Here, we show how Hedges' g, the bias corrected version of Cohen's d, and its confidence interval can be obtained from SPM t maps. We then demonstrate how these values can be used to evaluate whether nonsignificant effects are really statistically smaller than significant effects to obtain "regions of undecidability" within a data set, and to test for the replicability and lateralization of effects. This method allows the analysis of fMRI data beyond point estimates enabling researchers to take measurement uncertainty into account when interpreting their findings.