Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-25T22:46:34.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

76 More Than One Way to Skin a Cortex: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Neuroimaging and Personality Testing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2023

Paola N. Asencio-Ortiz ,
Vasilios C. Ikonomou ,
Murphy N. Harrell ,
Rhea Maladkar  and
Benjamin D. Hill
Paola N. Asencio-Ortiz*
Affiliation:
The University of South Albama, Mobile, Alabama, USA.
Vasilios C. Ikonomou
Affiliation:
The University of South Albama, Mobile, Alabama, USA.
Murphy N. Harrell
Affiliation:
Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth University, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA.
Rhea Maladkar
Affiliation:
Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, USA
Benjamin D. Hill
Affiliation:
The University of South Albama, Mobile, Alabama, USA.
*
Correspondence: Paola Asencio-Ortiz The University of South Alabama pna2021@jagmail.southalbama.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

Neuroimaging is commonly used in medicine to identify neuropathology and is widely considered to be a reliable and valid diagnostic modality. Personality testing is commonly used to identify psychopathology but is generally perceived to have less clinical efficacy than neuroimaging. The purpose of the current study was to compare the clinical efficacy of personality tests to neuroimaging using meta-analysis.

Participants and Methods:

Multiple databases were searched for original research utilizing either personality tests or neuroimaging. The search interval covered articles published within the last 10 years. Studies were selected based on the criteria of having a clinical group and a healthy control sample with a reported diagnostic outcome. For this meta-analysis, neuroimaging studies focusing on diagnostic utility for Alzheimer’s dementia were included. Personality testing studies were included if they broadly reported a clinical outcome, due to fewer studies in this area. Studies were coded using a complex multi-comparison, outcome, and subgroup schema, and were analyzed under random-effects modeling.

Results:

Out of the 240 studies identified for the personality domain, 13 were selected for the meta-analysis. Out of 6522 studies identified for the neuroimaging domain, 21 studies were selected for the meta-analysis. Results indicated a significant difference between the neuroimaging and personality testing effect sizes. Specifically, neuroimaging [Hedge’s g = -1.623, 95% CI = -1.973 to -1.273, p<.001] yielded a greater effect size in comparison to the personality tests effect size [Hedge’s g = -0.658, 95% CI = -0.751 to -0.565, p<.001]. The effect size for clinical utility of neuroimaging was close to double that of the effect for personality tests diagnostic utility.

Conclusions:

Findings from this meta-analysis showed a significant difference in the effect sizes obtained from neuroimaging studies compared to the studies of personality tests. While both neuroimaging and personality testing demonstrated meaningful clinical utility, neuroimaging studied had a larger effect size.

Keywords

personalityneuroimaging: functional
Type
Poster Session 05: Neuroimaging | Neurophysiology | Neurostimulation | Technology | Cross Cultural | Multiculturalism | Career Development
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 29 , Supplement s1: Final Program Fifty First Annual Meeting International Neuropsychological Society February 1–4, 2023 San Diego, CA, USA , November 2023 , pp. 481
Copyright
Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2023