The Hidden Landscape of Missed Effects in Human Functional Neuroimaging
Functional neuroimaging aims to uncover brain processes underlying behavior and disease, yet studies are often underpowered to detect these effects. How this literature has shaped our understanding of brain function remains unknown, and little guidance exists for planning better powered studies. An underappreciated barrier is that commonly reported effect sizes across the brain are inflated, biasing study planning. Here, we introduce a correction for this inflation bias and show how more accurate studies can be planned using corrected effect size benchmarks from a mega-analysis of 63 typical studies across seven large datasets (52,979 participants). We find that common methods of planning studies based on uncorrected effects lead to roughly half the expected detections at typical sample sizes, with limited spatial overlap with original findings. These missed effects collectively explain meaningful additional variance in the desired outcome. We show how to recover missed effects by planning not only for power but also for a target number of detections via corrected benchmarks, or by taking a whole-brain approach with multivariate effects that individual research groups can detect (n < 50 compared to n > 1,000 for a typical univariate effect). These findings lay the groundwork for more informed study planning and a richer understanding of the widespread nature of brain effects, with implications for shared challenges (and solutions) across biomedicine.