 |
 |
GLM Flex by Aaron Schultz will let you look at the voxels where only some subjects have data. Best Regards, Donald McLaren ================= D.G. McLaren, Ph.D. Research Fellow, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School Postdoctoral Research Fellow, GRECC, Bedford VA 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 Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Ce Mo <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear All, > > I found a mismatch between the group level mask and individual masks when > I was inspecting and comparing group mask image and the mask images > generated during 1st level analyses for each subject. My best guess of the > cause of this situation is the relatively large individual variation during > single-subject modeling. > > If I understand it correctly, only the voxels within the group mask, which > is the intersection of all individual masks, are analyzed on the group > level. Hence, such mismatch may result in unexpected loss of information. > (Specifically, the group mask might fail to cover all the available voxels > for a sub set of subjects) > . > Are there any ways to deal with this problem? > > Many thanks and Best regards, > Ce >