Hi,
> Your abstrac is very intresting, could you email me a PDF of your HBM
> poster? With your MP2 beeing significant in 55% of the subjects
> wouldn't it be fair to always include both MP and MP2 but only
> optionally MP+1 and MP2+1?
I think I based my moderate lack of interest in MP2 on the rather
small F value, but you could easily argue it the other way.
> I don't like the idea of including MP only
> for at least one reason: "Imagine you have a GM voxel between two WM
> voxels then movement in opposite direction would lead to a signal
> change in the same direction which you cannot model with MP only,
> right?"
Yes... It would be interesting to see where the MP2 effects appeared...
Best,
Matthew
|