JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for SPM Archives


SPM Archives

SPM Archives


SPM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SPM Home

SPM Home

SPM  2000

SPM 2000

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: block design question

From:

Rik Henson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Rik Henson <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 26 Apr 2000 12:36:16 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (134 lines)


Russ/Kalina -

The critical issue is the power spectrum of the CONTRAST of
conditions, relative to the power spectrum of the haemodynamic
response (in order to maximise the area under the product).
For a simple [activation - rest] contrast in an on-off design,
the optimal blocked design is one with a fundamental frequency 
close to the dominant frequency of the haemodynamic response
(from the signal perspective; not necessarily from the 
psychological perspective), ie a block length of 10-12s, with 
a fundamental period of 20-24s. With longer blocks than this, 
measurable signal will be greater for higher frequency contrasts.
In Kalina's A1 B A2 B... design for example, even with equal 
block lengths, the [(A1+A2)-B] contrast will have more power at 
higher frequencies, to which fMRI is more sensitive (given the 
low frequency noise), than a [A1-A2] contrast. Note the 
direction of the contrast is not relevant to optimal
block length; the different results from Kalina's [(A1+A2)-B]
and [B-(A1+A2)] contrasts I assume reflect real effects - ie greater
activity in the B condition than average of A1 and A2 conditions.
If one desires similar sensitivities to both (A1 - B) and
(A1 - A2) contrasts, then the permuted design suggested by
Kalina is good (though not as good as a fixed order B A1 A2 
B A1 A2, apart from associated problems of counterbalancing).

As for the question of different block lengths, the
answer depends on the average block length. For shortish
block lengths (eg 20s), equal block lengths are probably 
better because they produce more power at the fundamental
modulation frequency close to the dominant haemodynamic 
response frequency. For long activation block lengths (eg 60s),
then making rest (null) conditions shorther than activation 
conditions is desirable, in order to move more experimental
power into frequencies closer to the haemodynamic response
and away from the low frequency noise.

Rik


Kalina Christoff wrote:
> 
> Russ,
> 
> We ran an almost identically designed study, with two semantic task
> conditions (say and A1 and A2) and a baseline (say B). There were
> 14-second blocks of baseline task interspersed in between 28-second blocks
> of semantic task, where every other semantic block was one of the two
> semantic task conditions. The order was basically: A1 B A2 B A1 B A2 B....
> (counterbalanced, as one might expect, across subject).
> 
> The problem I found with this though (of which I wish I had though
> ealier) is that the frequency structure of the baseline compared to
> that of each of the experimental conditions is very different, giving a
> strong advantage to the baseline (which has twice the fundamental
> frequency of the exp. task). I would be really interested to hear people's
> comments on the theoretical side of this, and whether theoretically one
> would expected significant differences between power in A1 and A2 compared
> to B. The practical side of it was that we did observed much stronger
> activations in the B vs. A(1&2) comparison than in the A(1&2) vs. B
> comparison, and in fact the typical activations that one would expect to
> see in the A(1&2) vs. B comparison were only very weakly showing up.
> 
> As a suggestion, it seems to me that a possible solution would be to have
> a mini-block, pseudorandomized design, with blocks A1, A2, and B having
> equal durations, and appearing in a randmozed fashion, e.g.:
> A1 B A1 A2 B A2 B etc...
> 
> I would be curious to see what other have say about this issue.
> 
> Best wishes,
> -k.
> 
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Russ Poldrack wrote:
> 
> > hi - I wanted to run a question by the group about an issue related to
> > blocked designs.  for a study I'm designing I have two conditions that I
> > would like to compare to each other (different types of auditory
> > stimuli) and to a silent baseline (stimuli are presented during gaps in
> > the scanner noise - TR=3s, acquisition time = 2s with 1s for stimulus
> > presentation).  The question that I have regards how much null time I
> > need in order to be able to faithfully model the response for each
> > condition compared to the null baseline.  In building an event-related
> > study I would usually want to have an amount of null-event time roughly
> > equal to the time spent on each condition of interest - this rationale
> > would lead me to use 12-second blocks of silence in between my 24-second
> > blocks of stimulation (where every other block is from one of the two
> > conditions).  However, I worry that this may not be enough time to get a
> > good baseline estimate.  Any advice on this issue would be greatly
> > appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > russ
> >
> > --
> > Russell A. Poldrack, Ph. D.
> > Assistant Professor of Radiology, Harvard Medical School
> > MGH-NMR Center
> > Building 149, 13th St.
> > Charlestown, MA 02129
> >
> > Phone: 617-726-4060
> > FAX:  617-726-7422
> > Email: [log in to unmask]
> > Web Page: http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~poldrack
> >
> >
> >
> 
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Kalina Christoff                      Email:  [log in to unmask]
>                                       Office: Rm.478; (650) 725-0797
> Department of Psychology              Home:   (650) 497-7170
> Jordan Hall, Main Quad                Fax:    (650) 725-5699
> Stanford, CA 94305-2130               http://www-psych.stanford.edu/~kalina/
> _____________________________________________________________________________

-- 

---------------------------8-{)}-------------------------

DR R HENSON              EMAIL [log in to unmask]
Wellcome Department of              
 Cognitive Neurology     TEL (work1)  +44 (0)20 7833 7483
12 Queen Square          TEL (work2)  +44 (0)20 7833 7472
London, WC1N 3BG         FAX          +44 (0)20 7813 1420

 URL: http://www.psychol.ucl.ac.uk/rik.henson/index.html

---------------------------------------------------------


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager