Relation between ISFC and individual differences in value learning
Lastly, we asked whether inter-individual differences in the constraints of activity and functional connectivity could explain inter-individual differences in learning. We observed that average task accuracy increased across the four days of task practice (Fig. 6A; Two-way ANOVA: \(F(3,80)=3.69,\ p=0.0169\)). Next, we computed
the Spearman correlation coefficient between each participant's task accuracy and the ISFC for each day. We observed significant correlations between the whole brain ISFC and accuracy for day 3 ( r =0.6227, p=0.0034) and for day 4 (r=0.4486, p=0.0473). Given this whole-brain effect, we next performed post-hoc analyses to determine which specific network module might be driving the relation between ISFC and task accuracy. We observed no significant correlation between each module ISFC and task accuracy for the first two days. However, on day 3, most of modules displayed ISFC whose magnitude was significantly and positively correlated with task accuracy: FT (r=0.4983, p=0.0253), SM(0.5722, p=0.0084), DMN(r=0.5202, p=0.0187), VIS(r=0.5827, p=0.007) and PCT (r=0.6242, p=0.0030). Only the PCT module displayed ISFC that was correlated with task accuracy on day 4 as shown in Figure 6B (r=0.4636, p=0.0394). Interestingly, we found no significant correlations between ISC and task accuracy, suggesting that learning performance is related to constraints on connectivity but not activity.