Revisiting Multi-Subject Random Effects in fMRI: Advocating Prevalence   Estimation
  Random Effects analysis has been introduced into fMRI research in order to generalize findings from the study group to the whole population. Generalizing findings is obviously harder than detecting activation in the study group since in order to be significant, an activation has to be larger than the inter-subject variability. Indeed, detected regions are smaller when using random effect analysis versus fixed effects. The statistical assumptions behind the classic random effects model are that the effect in each location is normally distributed over subjects, and "activation" refers to a non-null mean effect. We argue this model is unrealistic compared to the true population variability, where, due to functional plasticity and registration anomalies, at each brain location some of the subjects are active and some are not. We propose a finite-Gaussian--mixture--random-effect. A model that amortizes between-subject spatial disagreement and quantifies it using the "prevalence" of activation at each location. This measure has several desirable properties: (a) It is more informative than the typical active/inactive paradigm. (b) In contrast to the hypothesis testing approach (thus t-maps) which are trivially rejected for large sample sizes, the larger the sample size, the more informative the prevalence statistic becomes.   In this work we present a formal definition and an estimation procedure of this prevalence. The end result of the proposed analysis is a map of the prevalence at locations with significant activation, highlighting activations regions that are common over many brains. 
Jonathan D. Rosenblatt and Matthijs Vink and Yoav Benjamini
stat.AP