Print

Print


Hi Andy,

Thanks for your response. I did include the motion parameters (the rp.txt
file) as additional multiple regressors. My contrast does not test for
these, but from my understanding, just including them in the model is
enough. Is that right?

Do you also think that this is not how typical output of SPM looks? (ie my
attachment in the previous email). This is my first time running an SPM
analysis, so it's difficult for me to judge.

However, now looking through the SPM manual, maybe my results are not that
bad, I am also attaching a screenshot of an example output from the manual
- there also you can see some dots outside the edges of the template brain.
Maybe this is normal then...

Thanks,
Joelle

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Andy Yeung <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Dear Joelle,
>
> Have you included head movement parameters as regressors of no interest?
> If there were serious head movements, the values of voxels at the edges
> might change dramatically and leading to false ''activations''.
>
> Best,
> Andy
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 8:28 PM, Joelle Zimmermann <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi All - I've ran a simple SPM analysis, and I notice that in the
>> outputted plots of the brains (please see attached), the dark dots
>> (representing activations) appear to be outside the edges of the brain. I'm
>> assuming this is not okay?
>>
>> My suspicion is that this is because the normalization was not done well.
>> Please also see the second attachment, which is the standard MNI template
>> (in red-yellow), overlaid over the normalized 4D functional image.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joelle
>>
>>
>>
>