That is very strange, and I cannot think of a reason why that would occur, unless one of you subjects is very noisy. You can look at the noise in your subjects with
tksurfer fsaverage rh inflated -ov rh.cesvar.nii -t rh.cesvar.nii
This will bring up a plot with all of your subjects, and you can all scroll through each subject as an overlay by changing the time point.
doug
Kathrin-Sophie Herbst wrote:
Hi,
for my second-level statistics I have been running a fixed-effects analysis as well as a random-effects-a. with mri_glmfit (11 subjects). It turns out that the fixed-effect-analyis shows hardly any effect while in the random-effects-analysis there are results (at a low threshold: 1.6 or 2). Vision versus rest looks fine in both and gets even stronger in the fixed effects. Is there a statistical reason for stonger outcomes in random-effects for results around the threshold or is this a hint for an error in my analysis? Thanks, Kathrin
my command was: mri_glmfit --y rh.ces.nii --osgm --glmdir rh.ffx.osgm --nii --mask ../rh.mask.nii --yffxvar rh.cesvar.nii --ffxdofdat ../ ffxdof.dat --surf fsaverage rh my computer: snapjudge my path: autofs/space/bomba_020/users/ksherbst/data/brightghosts_loc/ loc_group_11 and I am running freesurfer stable 4
Freesurfer mailing list Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer