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 Chen
May 29, 2004 06:56AM
In a different session, we repeated the experiment, randomized block
design, but now we run A1B1 against A1B2. No fixation.

By 'no fixation' do you mean that there were no fixation periods in your experiment design with two stimuli A1B1 and A1B2? You would have to add some fixation periods (30% - 50% of the total scanning time) in the design so that regression analysis can estimate the baseline and any drifting effect with reasonable confidence.

Have you tried simple regression with 3dDeconvolve by modeling the impulse response function with some standardized format such as gamma variates (via AFNI program 'waver') ? With block design, simple regression may generate more meaningful and better results than deconvolution.

Gang
Reply Quote
RSS
Subject Author Posted

GLT Deconvolve confusion

Kai Schreiber May 28, 2004 11:02PM

Re: GLT Deconvolve confusion

Gang Chen May 29, 2004 06:56AM