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  

|
November 07, 2005 02:34PM
Hello.

I am interested in looking at preparation for inhibition using an oculomotor task. My design consists of two trial types - antisaccade and prosaccade. Each type has a cue and a response. The only difference between the two trial types is the instruction given in the cue (anti or pro); the responses are both an eye movement. My main interest is what happens during the cue time in the antisaccade trials.

Is it necessary to jitter the time between the cue and the response in order to pull apart these two trial components? I would rather not do this so as not to introduce working memory. So, is it sufficient to present the components so that they do not always go together? For example: I am equating the responses for both types of trials. If I present three trial variations - 1. anti cue - response, 2. pro cue - response, and 3. anti cue only - with jittered ITI, is this sufficient to pull out activation related to anti cue, pro cue, and response using three regressors in 3dDeconvolve?

Thanks in advance.

Subject Author Posted

fast event-related design

Krista November 07, 2005 02:34PM