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  

|
July 01, 2009 04:19PM
James,

I don't know what's going on, but you really have some weird input files. Basically all those subjects don't vary much in terms of the contrast between the two conditions compared to the within-subject variability, and you can see that both tau^2 (sub-birck #2, cross-subject variance) and Qe (sub-brick #3, chi-square test for Ho: tau^2 = 0) in both of your output files are all 0's across the brain, which means that the random-effects model is essentially equivalent to a fixed-effects model! And in such a special scenario t-statistic is definitely more appropriate than Z.

You can run 3dANOVA2 -type 3 on your data, and the result should be similar to 3dMEMA with t-statistic as output.

This makes me think that maybe I should just stick with t-statistic and dump Z? Hmm...

Gang
Subject Author Posted

3dMEMA z stat vs. t stat

James July 01, 2009 11:26AM

Re: 3dMEMA z stat vs. t stat

Gang Chen July 01, 2009 11:48AM

Re: 3dMEMA z stat vs. t stat

James July 01, 2009 12:05PM

Re: 3dMEMA z stat vs. t stat

Gang Chen July 01, 2009 04:19PM

Re: 3dMEMA z stat vs. t stat

James July 02, 2009 12:24PM

Re: 3dMEMA z stat vs. t stat

Gang Chen July 02, 2009 01:41PM