Print

Print


Hi Berel,

If I have understood what Anderson wants to tell you is that if you can, reduce the number of co-variates, if this is possible. Think that for every co-variate you enter in your model, you loos a Degree of Freedom and your sample is little to apply so many co-variates.  For example, if you have 5 different vascular risk factors (Hypertension, Diabetes, Dyslipemia and Alcohol Consumption...) and they are highly correlated between them, something that in this case, use to happen, then you should try to reduce them into one or two variables only...and so on for the other co-variates...In order to know this, you can run bivariate correlations and see how your data behaviour regarding their relations/correlations between them...and between your variables of interest. Once you have seen this, you can try to add those variables into a PCA model and just extract the components whose weight is higher than one...this will help you to be more "parsimoniuos" taking into account the size of your data.

You can find some good explanations about how to do this with SPSS in Google...you can extract Factors and save them as the new variables you have chosen for covariation. Also, as Anderson recommended me, be aware of circularity in your post-hoc analyses....

Hope this helps...

Kind regards,

Rosalia.

2016-01-20 13:38 GMT+01:00 Berel Weinhöppel <[log in to unmask]>:
Hi Anderson,

thanks for the quick response.


So i Have 40 subjects overall (20 each Group)
36 fMRI nuisance variables (for our purpose i think each of them should get two EVs, so 72EVs)
2 cortisol data (this would sum up to 4 EVs)
3 Rating Scales (6 EVs)
Age and Gender (one EV for each of them should be enough,  because they are highly correlated)
and 2 EVs of interest.

If I understood you correctly, I need more EVs than Subjects. In the best case 10-20 subjects more than EVs.
That means I cannot put everything in one matrix. Does the same go with testing for interactions? And how would you recommend to proceed with the matrices? (would the 5 different design matrices, as explained in my previous message, be a good idea in my case with 86 EVs and 40 Subjects?)

I didn't quite understand what you meant by
"If you happen {...}, although making the model more parsimonious by reducing redundancies is often a good idea."

Thanks a lot. You are of great help to me!

Berel