In a recent data analysis, we re-ran feat processing at the single subject level (in order to change
the registration target only) and were surprized to find that the resultant statistical data were
much altered. The re-analysis was set up using the FEAT directory as input. Our expectation was
that this would simply re-run the GLM and registration based on filtered_func data. Instead, from
the report.com file, it appears that feat also repeated the smoothing on filtered_func, which had
dramatic effects on the stats.
Is this the expected behavior or a bug? Is it permissible to repeat a first level analysis using the
directory as input, or should we manually select the input files.