✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
fMRI and PET scans demonstrate high statistical reliability.
the verdict
CONTESTED
contested - the weight sits with the supporting side
Recorded sources
6 sources for · 2 against
Is it true that fMRI and PET scans demonstrate high statistical reliability?
Partly. The statistical reliability of fMRI and PET scans remains contested, with some studies showing good reproducibility under controlled conditions while comprehensive multiverse analyses highlight consistently low individual-level test-retest reliability.
Verdict: CONTESTED · 6 sources for, 2 against · Last checked
The analysis
The retrieved literature presents mixed findings. While several specific methodologies, paradigms, or high-field scans report good reproducibility or reliability (e.g., papers 0, 6, 9, 11), broader assessments and multiverse analyses (such as paper 7) demonstrate that individual-level test-retest reliability in task fMRI is often low and highly dependent on analytical pipelines. Therefore, the claim is CONTESTED.
The evidence we hold leans leans supported
How this was weighed
official record 3x · fact-check 2x · hedged 1x · crowd & reference 1x
- Test–retest reliability of arterial spin labeling with commo · peer-reviewed · supports · weight 2 · 2011
- Reliability and reproducibility of the venous excess ultraso · peer-reviewed · supports · weight 1.3 · 2024
- Test–retest reliability of a functional MRI anticipatory anx · peer-reviewed · supports · weight 1.3 · 2008
- A New Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Localizer for Pr · peer-reviewed · supports · weight 1.3 · 2022
- An automated algorithm for the detection of cortical interru · peer-reviewed · supports · weight 1.3 · 2018
- Seed‐based test–retest reliability of resting state function · peer-reviewed · supports · weight 1.3 · 2021
- Test–retest reliability of dynamic functional connectivity i · peer-reviewed · refutes · weight 1.3 · 2021
- Impact of analytic decisions on test–retest reliability of i · peer-reviewed · refutes · weight 1.3 · 2024
Evidence for · 6
Get citation
Chen, Y., Wang, D. J., & Detre, J. A. (2011). Test–retest reliability of arterial spin labeling with common labeling strategies. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22345
Evidence against · 2
Get citation
Zhang, X., Liu, J., Yang, Y., Zhao, S., Guo, L., Han, J., & Hu, X. (2021). Test–retest reliability of dynamic functional connectivity in naturalistic paradigm functional magnetic resonance imaging. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25736
See more details
More for · 5
Get citation
Longino, A., Martin, K. C., Leyba, K., McCormack, L., Siegel, G., Sharma, V., Riscinti, M., López, C. O., Douglas, I. S., & Gill, E. (2024). Reliability and reproducibility of the venous excess ultrasound (VExUS) score, a multi-site prospective study: validating a novel ultrasound technique for comprehensive assessment of venous congestion. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-04961-9
Get citation
Schunck, T., Erb, G., Mathis, A., Jacob, N., Gilles, C., Namer, I. J., Meier, D., & Luthringer, R. (2008). Test–retest reliability of a functional MRI anticipatory anxiety paradigm in healthy volunteers. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21237
Get citation
Elin, K., Malyutina, S., Bronov, O., Stupina, E., Marinets, A., Zhuravleva, A., & Dragoy, O. (2022). A New Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Localizer for Preoperative Language Mapping Using a Sentence Completion Task: Validity, Choice of Baseline Condition, and Test–Retest Reliability. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.791577
Get citation
Peters, M., Jong, J. D., Scharmga, A., Tubergen, A., Geusens, P., Loeffen, D., Weijers, R., Boyd, S. K., Barnabe, C., Stok, K. S., Rietbergen, B., & Bergh, J. (2018). An automated algorithm for the detection of cortical interruptions and its underlying loss of trabecular bone; a reproducibility study. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-018-0255-7
Get citation
Nemani, A. & Lowe, M. J. (2021). Seed‐based test–retest reliability of resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging at 3T and 7T. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.15210
More against · 1
Get citation
Demidenko, M. I., Mumford, J., & Poldrack, R. (2024). Impact of analytic decisions on test–retest reliability of individual and group estimates in functional magnetic resonance imaging: A multiverse analysis using the monetary incentive delay task. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1162/imag_a_00262
Related receipts
Receipt History
first checked04 Aug 2026
judged → CONTESTED · 5004 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any
personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check
or guarantee a response time.
Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.
This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work