Thanks Gang!
Sorry my second question wasn't clear but you basically interpreted it correctly. That's what I thought as well (it not being feasible at the event related level) but it's nice to have it confirmed.

Two final questions: I've used PROC_PY to generate my preprocessing scripts for the first analysis run-through. For the final analysis I am using 3dREMLfit to get my stats but I notice my REML command, as generated by PROC, uses the Xmat created by the previous 3dDeconvolve command as I've copied below.

3dREMLfit -matrix X.xmat.1D \
 -input "pb05.sub-S08V1A.r01.scale+tlrc.HEAD pb05.sub-S08V1A.r02.scale+tlrc.HEAD pb05.sub-S08V1A.r03.scale+tlrc.HEAD" \
 -tout -Rbuck stats.sub-S08V1A_REML -Rvar stats.sub-S08V1A_REMLvar \
 -Rerrts errts.sub-S08V1A_REML -verb $*

So I just wanted to check: 1) When I re-run new code using the

-stim_times_IM

option do I need to rerun 3dDeconvolve with the

-stim_times_IM

option, 3dREMLfit with the option, or both?

2) Even though I ultimately will be using this output for an ROI analysis, I would still use the same input files as above, correct? These are whole-brain files. I'm assuming that I rerun whole-brain deconvolution with the new options then extract the ROI betas from the new output just like a "regular" ROI analysis.

Thank you for all of your help!
Lauren