Hi - you can also look in design.con to get the effective p-p height
of each contrast. It sounds like it would be worth reading more
detail about how these factors interact - there's a draft paper on
our estimability stuff (just submitted) at:
www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve/ftp/estimability.pdf
Cheers, Steve.
On 29 May 2006, at 22:14, Eyleen Zhang wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> I still have more questions coming.
> The product of EV value * PPheight is the part of signal explained
> by that particular EV in the entire COPE, and I can compare the
> numbers from different EVs to conclude which one is more important.
> But how does this ink with precent signal change of that COPE?
>
> The EV values are from the second column of peristimulus plot raw
> data. I'm still not sure how I can make use of the full model fit
> and partial model fit data.
> In terms of EVs, I set up 12 original EVs representing 12 different
> types of stimuli and they evolve into 24 original plus real EVs. I
> shall use only the original EVs for the calculation, which is every
> other EVs in the output. Meanwhile, the real EV stands for the
> confounding effect of the original EV.
> Thanks very much for your help.
>
> Eyleen
>
>
> On 5/28/06, Steve Smith <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The best thing is to simply use the EV values multiplied by the
> PPheight of that EV from the design.mat header - much easier!
> Cheers.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Stephen M. Smith, Professor of Biomedical Engineering
Associate Director, Oxford University FMRIB Centre
FMRIB, JR Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK
+44 (0) 1865 222726 (fax 222717)
[log in to unmask] http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/~steve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
|