Replication Challenges in Linking Personality to Resting-State Functional Connectomics

Abstract

An increasing number of studies are currently focusing on personality neuroscience, a term denoting the research aimed at neuroimaging correlates of inter-individual temperament and character variability. Among other methods, a graph theoretical analysis of the functional connectivity in resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data was applied in a study by Gao et al. (2013), reporting novel functional connectivity correlates of personality traits. The current paper presents a conceptual replication of the results of this study and discusses the related challenges, including an extension of the original statistical methods in order to illustrate the effect of the multiple comparison problem. Five personality dimensions were obtained using the revised Big Five Personality Inventory, including scores of Extraversion and Neuroticism covered in the original paper. Using a larger sample (84 subjects) with adequate statistical power (ranging from 0.75 to 0.95 across analyses), we failed to replicate any of the nine specific neuroimaging correlates of personality presented by Gao et al. While acknowledging differences in the experimental procedures, we discuss that the lack of replication might be caused by the relatively liberal control of false positives in the original study. Indeed, the original testing scheme leads to an expected count of about 10 false positive observations among all tests; applying this scheme to our data we observed a similar number of positive tests, albeit for different relations. No significant correlations were found in our data when standard family-wise error control was applied. These results illustrate the importance of combining exploration with independent validation, use of large datasets, as well as appropriate control of multiple comparison problem in order to prevent false alarms in research into neural substrates of personality differences. Importantly, our findings do not disprove the existence of a link between personality and the brains intrinsic functional architecture; but rather suggest that such a link might be even more subtle and elusive than previously reported.