Thank you, Anderson! I was able to figure out the convolution part.For the linear contrast question:Rather than making a model with 4 EVs of cond1-control, cond2-control, cond3-control, and cond1+cond2+cond3+controlWould it be appropriate to make the following EV?Linear: -1.5*control - 0.5*cond1 + 0.5*cond2 + 1.5*cond3If so, would it need to include the following EVs as well to make it complete?Average: .25*control + .25*cond1 + .25*cond2 + .25*cond3Quadratic: -.5*control + .5*cond1 + .5*cond2 - .5*cond3I hope this is more clear.Thank you again!,Ekarin--Hi Ekarin,Please see below:On 12 March 2018 at 13:58, Ekarin Pongpipat <[log in to unmask]> wrote:Hi FSL experts,
I had several questions about creating the PSYCH term (i.e., a contrast; https://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/PPIFAQ ). If I have four related stimuli conditions in a block-design, is it possible to make the following contrasts within the same model: cond1-control, cond2-control, cond3-control?Yes, create these 3 EVs with the differences, and include a 4th EV that is cond1+cond2+cond3+control.Would it be appropriate to convolve this contrast?Yes, it is appropriate to do the convolutions on these EVs (not contrasts) before or after the subtractions, and also multiply by the physiological measurement.If so, how would you determine the duration of the convolution (note: block duration for cond1, cond2, and cond3 are the same but the block duration for control is much shorter).I don't understand this question.
In a different PPI model, is it possible to model the PSYCH term as a linear contrast? If so, would I need to also include an average and quadratic contrast to make the model complete? And similarly, would the convolution be appropriate here as well?I don't understand this question either, sorry.All the best,Anderson
Thank you!,
Ekarin
Ekarin E. Pongpipat, M.A.Ph.D. Student in Cognition and NeuroscienceCognitive Neuroscience of Aging LaboratoryCenter for Vital Longevity