The solution is GLM Flex.
http://nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/harvardagingbrain/People/AaronSchultz/GLM_Flex.html
Best Regards, Donald McLaren
=================
D.G. McLaren, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Research Fellow, GRECC, Bedford VA
Research Fellow, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and
Harvard Medical School
Website: http://www.martinos.org/~mclaren
Office: (773) 406-2464
=====================
This e-mail contains CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION which may contain PROTECTED
HEALTHCARE INFORMATION and may also be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED and which is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the
reader of the e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that you are in possession of confidential and privileged
information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any
action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail
unintentionally, please immediately notify the sender via telephone at (773)
406-2464 or email.
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Chris Bishop <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have what I think (and hope) is a relatively simple question. I've dug
> through the archives, but haven't quite found what I'm looking for.
>
> I'm attempting to use SPM8's Factorial Design to approach a whole brain, 2x2
> mixed ANOVA at the second level. The first factor (group, either group 1 or
> group 2) is a between subject factor while the second factor (response,
> either response A or response B) is a *within subject* factor.
>
> While I can find clearly laid out examples explaining how to specify either
> a within or between subject design, I cannot find a good example of how to
> specify a mixed design. I am interested in assessing both main effects
> (group and response) as well as the [group x response] interaction.
>
> Also, it seems that SPM uses a single error estimate (which to my
> understanding means the same error term for main effects and
> interactions...?) by default. I'd be very interested to learn whether or
> not it is possible to use different error terms for each main effect and the
> interaction within the same model. Granted, this can be done rather easily
> using several paired/two-sample t-tests at the 2nd level, but that ideally
> requires correction for multiple comparisons that I'd like to avoid if at
> all possible.
>
> Thank you for your time.
>
> -Chris
|