Thank you Tim. I agree about effect size maps being better, but reviewers
always want to know what is significant (they are set in their ways!!) So maybe
we can do both; an effect size map and then .95-1 in the corr p map?
On Mar 16, 2018, at 4:59 PM, Timothy Coalson
You can do whatever you need to to satisfy your reviewers, of course.
Showing both in one panel was the idea behind turning the significant
regions into label outlines. Take a look at page 5 here:
https://wustl.app.box.com/s/ti46uqqlukqnh4u97aw74r53r7p8xu3c
In this case, the very large group
Since the extent that passes significance tests is dependent on number of
subjects and other statistical power considerations, we instead recommend
viewing the effect size (beta) map. You can overlay outlines of what
passed the significance threshold by making that into a label file with
Hi,
In documentation for randomise, when viewing the 1-p results in FSLView the
min/max display range should be set to 0.95/1.0 so that values less than 0.95
(equivalent to p>0.05) are not shown. If these are corrected values (i.e.
corrp) then the visible areas correspond to the statistically
