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>