 |
 |
I fixed it. thanks for the help! On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Leslie Engineering < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > Yes, I checked again. It is higher-level/no-timeseries design. > > Would it make more sense to do a column of 1s and 2s for the two different > groups then a column of 1s for visit 1 and a column of 1s for visit 2? I am > not sure what contrasts I would use, though. > > How would you do 2 groups with two visits? > > Thanks, > Leslie > > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Mark Jenkinson <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Your design shouldn't be rank deficient as a *higher level* design. >> Are you sure you've selected the higher-level analysis mode in >> the FEAT GUI? >> >> All the best, >> Mark >> >> On 3 Jan 2012, at 19:12, Leslie Engineering wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Mark Jenkinson <[log in to unmask]>wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Can you give us some more details about how "fsl didn't seem to like >>> this"? >>> >>> All the best, >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> On 3 Jan 2012, at 17:19, Leslie Engineering wrote: >>> >>> > I am not sure how to write my evs or contrast files. I have 53 >>> subjects. 24 control and 29 patient. Each of these subjects came for two >>> visits. >>> > >>> > I tried simply : >>> > EV1: putting 1s in the control visit one rows >>> > EV2: putting 1s in the control visit two rows >>> > EV3: 1s in patient visit one rows >>> > EV3: 1s in patient visit two rows >>> > >>> > and making contrasts EV1>EV2, EV2>EV1, EV1> EV3, EV3>EV1... etc >>> > >>> > fsl didn't seem to like this. >>> > >>> > Next I tried >>> > >>> > EV1: 1s for control visit one, -1s control visit 2 >>> > EV2: 1s for patient visit one, -1s patient " " >>> > etc... >>> > >>> > >>> > It didn't seem to like this design, either. >>> > >>> > Is there any advice for me? >>> > >>> > I want to compare visit one within groups as well as across groups and >>> likewise with visit 2 >>> > >>> > Thanks! >>> >> >> <error_design.tiff> >> >> >> >