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 19, 2004 01:05PM
However, if you use setup A, doesn't that assume that all the measures came from the same person or be the same as if the observations came from the same person. It doesn't take advantage of the random subjects. In the case of setup A, you can't calculate the subject effect, but subject differences do account for some variance. In setup B, you lose that information. In the AFNI manual, after taking a closer look, Example 2 of 3dANOVA3 uses subject as a random factor and has only one datapoint per cell. Is this a bad example? I also, was looking at "Design Analysis, A researcher's Handbook" by Keppel under the chapters on within-subject designs. Of which I was talking about above was. Essentially, the two factors a and b are within-subject factors and the factor c is between subjects. Does that change the interpretation or decision on which to use? It seems like I would want to use his (AxBxS) matrix and only interpret the A and B factors.

Donald
Subject Author Posted

3dANOVA....

Donald McLaren February 17, 2004 10:44PM

Re: 3dANOVA....

Gang Chen February 18, 2004 10:31AM

Re: 3dANOVA....

Donald February 19, 2004 01:05PM

Re: 3dANOVA....

Gang Chen February 19, 2004 01:47PM