AFNI Message Board

Dear AFNI users-

We are very pleased to announce that the new AFNI Message Board framework is up! Please join us at:

https://discuss.afni.nimh.nih.gov

Existing user accounts have been migrated, so returning users can login by requesting a password reset. New users can create accounts, as well, through a standard account creation process. Please note that these setup emails might initially go to spam folders (esp. for NIH users!), so please check those locations in the beginning.

The current Message Board discussion threads have been migrated to the new framework. The current Message Board will remain visible, but read-only, for a little while.

Sincerely, AFNI HQ

History of AFNI updates  

Previous Message Next Message
Message List New Topic Print View
|
gang
March 17, 2017 03:58PM
Fabio,

I'm not so sure why you modeled the hemodynamic response with 'SIN(0,20,10)'. It seems to me that 'BLOCK(30,1)' would make more sense to me.

> we wonder whether is it more correct to bring to the second level the results of an F test. What do you think?

No, the F-stat shows the significance for a specific null hypothesis for each subject, and would not be a reasonable candidate for group analysis. You want to make some statistical inference based on the physical measurement or effect estimate.

Gang
Reply Quote
RSS
Subject Author Posted

Second level analysis from 3dDeconvolve output

fabio_mangini March 16, 2017 10:37AM

Re: Second level analysis from 3dDeconvolve output

gang March 16, 2017 11:47AM

Re: Second level analysis from 3dDeconvolve output

fabio_mangini March 17, 2017 05:25AM

Re: Second level analysis from 3dDeconvolve output

fabio_mangini March 17, 2017 07:23AM

Re: Second level analysis from 3dDeconvolve output

gang March 17, 2017 03:58PM