“…The outcomes associated with the entire population were considered as reference since 36 is within the range of sample sizes generally involved in this kind of study. This number was deemed appropriate to assume the results were reliable, i.e., representative of the theorical population, in line with the scientific literature [ 32 ]. These subgroups were chosen since: (i) in the literature there is a large consensus considering [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 ] the optimal range of participants in neuroimaging studies [ 33 ]; (ii) in order to perform Analysis of Variance, the number of cases (i.e., 630) has to be much higher than the number of groups (i.e., five).…”