Do you suggest using random-effect model? Is there any problem with using a fix-effect model (other than the fact that by using this model we can not predict response of subjects outside our population)? 

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Douglas N Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> wrote:

It should be roughly the sum of the dofs of the individual subjects. Why are you using a fixed-effects model?
doug

SHAHIN NASR wrote:
  Thanks Doug. Just one related question. Should I also generate a new ffxdof.dat file for this map? I assumed that ffxdof depends on the number of subjects (session) and since number of subjects (sessions) is the same between the two groups then I can use those values, generated by isxconcat-sess for either map1 or map2. Right?



On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Douglas N Greve <greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>> wrote:

   Hi Shahin, it is not as simple as doing a subtraction of the
   cesvar files. What you are trying to get is the expected variance
   of your difference between the ces files (as a variance, it must
   be positive). To get this you need

   cesvardiff = (cesvar1+cesvar2)/(2^2)

   The 2^2 is the number of inputs (2) squared.

   doug


   SHAHIN NASR wrote:

       Hi,

        I have generated two different functional connectivity maps
       for two different ROI-based seeds. These maps are based on
       group-average of the same subjects (generated by using
       separate isxconcat-sess commands ), and now I want to see the
       difference map. To do so, I used mris_calc as below.
       > mris_calc -o diff_map/rh.ces.nii   map1/rh.ces.nii   sub          map2/rh.ces.nii

       Also, to generate the rh.cesvar.nii file I used this command:
        > mris_calc -o diff_map1/rh.cesvar.nii    map1/rh.cesvar.nii
         sub   map2/rh.cesvar.nii

       But then when I used the glmfit with WLS option as below:

       > mri_glmfit --y rh.ces.nii --osgm --glmdir rh.ffx.osgm.wls
       --nii --mask ../rh.mask.nii --yffxvar rh.cesvar.nii
       --ffxdofdat ../ffxdof.dat --surf fsaverage rh --wls rh.cesvar.nii

        I faced an error saying: "Error: MRInormWeights: values less
       than or eq to 0" which I assumed is related to an error in
       rh.cesvar.nii file (am I right?). Would you tell me how can I
       fix this problem?

       P.S.: please note that sequence of subjects and all MRI
       parameters are exactly the same between the two maps.

       --         Shahin Nasr

       PhD in Cognitive Neuroscience
       Martinos Imaging Center, MGH
       Harvard Medical School


   --     Douglas N. Greve, Ph.D.
   MGH-NMR Center
   greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu <mailto:greve@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
   Phone Number: 617-724-2358 <tel:617-724-2358> Fax: 617-726-7422
   <tel:617-726-7422>

   Bugs: surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting
   <http://surfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/fswiki/BugReporting>
   FileDrop: www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html
   <http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/facility/filedrop/index.html>




   The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to
   whom it is
   addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and
   the e-mail
   contains patient information, please contact the Partners
   Compliance HelpLine at
   http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to
   you in error
   but does not contain patient information, please contact the
   sender and properly
   dispose of the e-mail.




--
Shahin Nasr

PhD in Cognitive Neuroscience
Martinos Imaging Center, MGH
Harvard Medical School




--
Shahin Nasr

PhD in Cognitive Neuroscience
Martinos Imaging Center, MGH
Harvard Medical School