"Interpretation of Z images: The significance of the BOLD response is significantly different from zero (or between A and B)."
Indeed. This was noted by Andrew Holmes awhile back:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=SPM;e560146e.99
"The statistic (SPM) images (SPMt_????.img & SPMF_????.img) should *not* be entered into a second level analysis if you want to effect a random effects analysis. This would basically be assessing the significance (across subjects) of the individual subjects significance! (Rather than the significance (across subjects) of the response."
Here's another post by Andrew noting that attempts to use the stats images rather than the con images can also end up yielding a fixed effects analysis rather than a random effects (really, mixed effects) analysis, thus preventing the drawing of a population-level inference:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=SPM;da36c3f8.99
|