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  

|
February 10, 2003 05:39PM

Hello Rutger:

The coefficient output from 3dDeconvolve represents the amplitude of the
response relative to baseline, NOT the percent change relative to baseline.

Therefore, if you want to use percent change, you will have to perform some
additional calculation (using 3dcalc, for example).

Program 3dDeconvolve estimates a single measurement variance. The calculation
assumes that the variance is constant across the entire time series. This
has implications for the analysis, depending on how changes in the baseline
effect the fMRI data.

If a change in the baseline between runs has no effect on the signal or noise
amplitudes, then no further adjustment is required.

If you believe that a change in baseline between runs results in a proportional
scaling of the amplitude of the response, as well as the measurement error,
then it would be better to "undo" this scale factor prior to the 3dDeconvolve
analysis. As I mentioned in the previous message, you could convert the
individual run time series to % signal relative to the baseline for each
individual run, prior to concatenation (and prior to 3dDeconvolve analysis).
In this case, the 3dDeconvolve output coefficients will represent % change
relative to baseline.

Doug Ward
Subject Author Posted

Comparing contrasts between two concatenated sessions

Rutger Goekoop February 07, 2003 11:41AM

Re: Comparing contrasts between two concatenated sessions

B. Douglas Ward February 07, 2003 01:57PM

Re: Comparing contrasts between two concatenated sessions

Rutger Goekoop February 10, 2003 11:21AM

Re: Comparing contrasts between two concatenated sessions

B. Douglas Ward February 10, 2003 05:39PM