<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=NL link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Hi Josh,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>You may have found something that is worth exploring. However, it will be challenge to provide a formal proof of the fact that the permutation analysis provides false alarm rate control under the null hypothesis of no interaction effect. The crucial design here is the full between-subjects design, because for the other designs a valid permutation analysis exists (as demonstrated by formal proof).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I would embark on a testing-the-limits simulation study:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>between/between</b>. Normally-distributed data in each of 4 cells. The effect size for e1 and e2 were each set to 1, with a SD of 1. The interaction (if present) was .75 with an SD of 1. There were 40 subjects per cell. <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Set the effect sizes to 20, reduce the number of subjects to 5 per cell, and simulate data without an interaction effect. I’m curious how the simulated false alarm rate of the permutation test looks like.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>(After this email, I will not continue this discussion any further. It is becoming a scientific project; interesting though …)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Eric<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>within/within. </b>For each participant, I generated a random intercept (M=0, SD=.25) and random slopes for both e1 and e2 (M=1, SD=.25) and for the interaction, if present (M=.75, SD=.25). Having generated that, for each participant in each condition, I drew a single sample where the mean was the sum of the effects just listed and the SD=1. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>within/between. </b>The first factor was within subjects and the second was between. Each subject had a random intercept (SD=.25) and a random slope for factor 1 (M=1, SD=.25). The subjects in Level 1 for both factors had a random intercept (M=.75, SD=.25). The between-subject factor was 1. As above, I then generated a single datapoint from a normal distribution (M=1, SD=1). <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>In each case, I ran 500 simulations with an interaction and 500 without. For each, I analyzed either with an ANOVA (ezANOVA in R) or a 500-sample permutation test, as follows: Permutations respected the structure of the data. So in the between/between case, condition labels were permuted freely. In the within/within case, for each subject, I randomly flipped the levels of each factor, preserving structure. That is, each subject had two cells where factor 1 was 0 and two where factor 1 was 1. If the codes switched, both the 1s were turned to 0s and both the 0s were turned to 1s. The same was done for Factor 2. I dealt with the within/between data in an analogous fashion, with the constraint that the same number of subjects be in the each of the between-subject conditions. Having done my permuting, I then calculated the F-stat for the interaction. I then compared the actual F-stat against the resulting distribution.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The short description of the result is I got basically the same results for the permutation tests and the ANOVA. For instance, in the within/within case, when there was an actual interaction in the generative model, I got an average p-value of .0844 using ezANOVA and .0858 using permutations. The Type II error was .318 and .312, respectively. When there was no interaction, I got average p-values of .5052 and .5066, respectively, and a Type I error of .036 and .038, respectively. I got analogous results for between/between and within/within. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Incidentally, I understand that it isn't strictly necessary to permute condition codes for both factors. But it doesn't seem to do any harm, either. I actually tried the within/between case permuting only the between factor, with similar results. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Josh<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 4:44 AM, <<a href="mailto:fieldtrip-request@science.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip-request@science.ru.nl</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi Steve and Josh,<br><br><br>Josh writes<br><br>> > labels. I'm sure there's a proof somewhere for why this doesn't work,<br>> > and it would be great to see it.<br><br>In general, questions like these are very hard to answer satisfactorily on a<br>discussion list. It is dealt with much more easily in person, say at one of<br>the Fieldtrip courses. However, let me give it a try.<br><br>To prove that something does not work it suffices to produces a single<br>example that shows the contrary.<br><br>Try the following:<br><br>Generate random data in a 2-by-2 between-subjects design (say, normally<br>distributed within every cell). Add large main effects (relative to the<br>within-cell variance; say, MS_beween 50 times larger than MS_within) and no<br>interaction effect. Take a small number of subjects (say, 5 per cell). Now,<br>calculate a permutation p-value for the interaction-effect F-statistic by<br>permuting across all 4 cells. Do this for a large number of simulated data<br>set. My prediction is that, on average, the F-statistic p-value is less than<br>0.05, which it should be (because there is no interaction effect).<br><br>I have not run this simulation study myself. Let me know if it does not<br>produce the predicted result. (I cannot guarantee that I'm not missing<br>something when producing this recipe.)<br><br><br><br>Best,<br><br>Eric<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Stephen Politzer-Ahles [mailto:<a href="mailto:politzerahless@gmail.com" target="_blank">politzerahless@gmail.com</a>]<br>> Sent: zondag 26 januari 2014 8:25<br>> To: <a href="mailto:fieldtrip@science.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@science.ru.nl</a><br>> Subject: Re: [FieldTrip] interactions<br>><br>> Hi Josh,<br>><br>> Have you seen this [admittedly pretty old now] message from the<br>> archives: <a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/2011-" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/2011-</a><br>> January/003447.html<br>> ? My understanding was that it is ok to test interactions in within-<br>> subjects designs, and that you could do it by faking a dataset that<br>> represents the interaction (step 3 in that message) and then doing a<br>> dependent samples t-test. I had never heard before that interactions<br>> can't be tested in a within-subjects design, but also it's been a long<br>> time since I've looked at this issue--I'd definitely be interested to<br>> hear if this is no longer the recommended way to test interactions. I<br>> have seen messages saying that it doesn't work for between-subjects<br>> designs (e.g.<br>> <a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/2011-" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/2011-</a><br>> September/004244.html),<br>> but I'm not sure if that's still current. Hopefully someone on the list<br>> can offer more insight about the second question.<br>><br>> Best,<br>> Steve<br>><br>> ><br>> > Message: 2<br>> > Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 10:54:10 -0500<br>> > From: Joshua Hartshorne <<a href="mailto:jkhartshorne@gmail.com" target="_blank">jkhartshorne@gmail.com</a>><br>> > To: <a href="mailto:fieldtrip@science.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@science.ru.nl</a><br>> > Subject: [FieldTrip] interactions<br>> > Message-ID:<br>> ><br>> > <CA+3amhe+x4+TNUY1tf0aXe-cf-AB1kTE+ZHTpuRJxNQ=<a href="mailto:bNioUQ@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">bNioUQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>> ><br>> > Hi List!<br>> ><br>> > I have seen around a dozen comments in the archives that interactions<br>> > can't be tested by permutation for within-subject designs. I haven't<br>> > been able to find a thread that explains why not. It seems like in a<br>> > 2x2 design, you could still pick one of the conditions and permute<br>> the<br>> > labels. I'm sure there's a proof somewhere for why this doesn't work,<br>> > and it would be great to see it.<br>> ><br>> > Similarly, for the mixed design, why permute the between-subject<br>> labels?<br>> > Why not permute the within-subject labels instead? Actually, why not<br>> > do both? I follow the reasoning why permuting both is overkill, but<br>> > not why it's wrong.<br>> ><br>> > If someone could explain, it would be much appreciated. Knowing what<br>> > to do is good, but it would be even better to understand why.<br>> ><br>> > Thanks,<br>> > Josh<br>> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was<br>> > scrubbed...<br>> > URL:<br>> ><br>> <<a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140124/" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140124/</a><br>> b885cb4a/attachment-0001.html><br>> ><br><br><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 2<br>Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 10:43:58 +0100<br>From: Azeez Adebimpe <<a href="mailto:ayobimpe2004@hotmail.com" target="_blank">ayobimpe2004@hotmail.com</a>><br>To: FieldTrip discussion list <<a href="mailto:fieldtrip@science.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@science.ru.nl</a>><br>Subject: Re: [FieldTrip] Urgent: Error in Source Statistics, Group<br> level<br>Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:DUB111-W130FC2F5C9CE7B2035F0BE4CDA30@phx.gbl">DUB111-W130FC2F5C9CE7B2035F0BE4CDA30@phx.gbl</a>><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br><br>Hi Chaitanya ,<br>I would suggest you try analyitcs instead of montecarlo and use stat= ft_sourcestatitics(cfg, source1a, source2a .................., source1b,source2b.............);a and b are for the conditions.<br>Azeez Adebimpe<br><br><br>Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 09:46:03 +0100<br>From: <a href="mailto:chaitanya.pro@gmail.com" target="_blank">chaitanya.pro@gmail.com</a><br>To: <a href="mailto:fieldtrip@science.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@science.ru.nl</a><br>Subject: Re: [FieldTrip] Urgent: Error in Source Statistics, Group level<br><br>Hi Eelke,<br><br>No significant results then in my data. I wonder how my boss takes it :P.<br>Anyway, thanks for your help on a Sunday that too.<br>>From your reply I also understand that the code doesn't have any mistakes :)<br><br>===============================================<br><br><br><br>Best RegardsChaitanya Srinivas Lanka<br><br><br>Wiss. Mitarbeiter PhD Student<br><br>Functional and Restorative Neurosurgery Neural Information Processing<br>Neurosurgical University Hospital Graduate Training Center for Neuroscience<br><br>Eberhard Karls University Eberhard Karls University<br><br>Otfried-Mueller-Str.45 ?sterbergstr. 3<br><br>D-72076 Tuebingen D-72074 Tuebingen<br><br>Mobile Phone Number : <a href="tel:%2B49-176-79035731" target="_blank">+49-176-79035731</a><br>===============================================<br><br><br><br><br><br>On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Eelke Spaak <<a href="mailto:eelke.spaak@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">eelke.spaak@donders.ru.nl</a>> wrote:<br><br>Hi Chaitanya,<br>stat.prob reflects the 'p-values' resulting from your statistical test. So voxels expressing e.g. stat.prob < 0.05 should be considered reflecting a significant difference between conditions. The NaNs correspond to voxels outside the brain.<br><br><br>Since stat.mask is all zeros (which by default is just stat.prob < 0.05), this indicates there are no significant differences between your conditions. There is nothing we can help you with in this respect :)<br><br><br>Best,Eelke<br><br>On 26 January 2014 09:06, Chaitanya Srinivas <<a href="mailto:chaitanya.pro@gmail.com" target="_blank">chaitanya.pro@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br><br>Hi Eelke,<br><br> I looked at the stat.stat values if that is what you mean. There are some NaNs , but also some values. Similarly in stat.prob, there are some 1's. The stat.mask is all zeros as you say.<br><br><br><br><br>Any further suggestions from you?<br>Thank you<br><br>===============================================<br><br><br><br>Best RegardsChaitanya Srinivas Lanka<br><br><br><br><br>Wiss. Mitarbeiter PhD Student<br><br><br><br>Functional and Restorative Neurosurgery Neural Information Processing<br>Neurosurgical University Hospital Graduate Training Center for Neuroscience<br><br><br><br>Eberhard Karls University Eberhard Karls University<br><br><br><br>Otfried-Mueller-Str.45 ?sterbergstr. 3<br><br><br><br>D-72076 Tuebingen D-72074 Tuebingen<br><br><br><br>Mobile Phone Number : <a href="tel:%2B49-176-79035731" target="_blank">+49-176-79035731</a><br>===============================================<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Eelke Spaak <<a href="mailto:eelke.spaak@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">eelke.spaak@donders.ru.nl</a>> wrote:<br><br><br><br>Dear Chaitanya,<br>Perhaps an obvious question: do you find any significant differences in the statistics step (inspect the stat structure)? If not, the mask will consist of all zeroes, hence giving you a 'blank' plot.<br><br><br><br><br>Best,Eelke<br><br>On 26 January 2014 08:46, Chaitanya Srinivas <<a href="mailto:chaitanya.pro@gmail.com" target="_blank">chaitanya.pro@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br><br><br><br>Dear fieldtrip users,<br>I would like to do sourcestatistics on a group level with eeg data. I have a<br>pre and post intervention measurement for each of my 10 subjects<br>. After source reconstruction using an DICS beamformer<br>and volume normalization, I calculated the sourcegrandaverage for the pre and<br>post condition and i have avg.pow for each subject.<br><br> However, when I use the grandaverage results in ft_sourcestatistics in the<br>configuration shown below and plot the result I just get a blank anatomical<br>mri. It only runs with cfg.parameter="pow" .I tried with cfg.parameter = 'avg.pow' it doesnt run.<br>Do I have to set any additional parameters or am I making some mistake?<br><br><br>cfg=[];<br>cfg.dim = grandAVGsourcePre.dim;<br>cfg.method = 'montecarlo';<br>cfg.statistic = 'depsamplesT';<br>cfg.parameter = 'pow';<br>cfg.correctm = 'cluster';<br>cfg.numrandomization = 1000;<br>cfg.alpha = 0.05;<br>cfg.tail = 0;<br><br>nsubj=length(sourcePre.trial);<br>cfg.design(1,:) = [1:nsubj 1:nsubj];<br>cfg.design(2,:) = [ones(1,nsubj) ones(1,nsubj)*2];<br>cfg.uvar = 1;<br>cfg.ivar = 2;<br>stat = ft_sourcestatistics(cfg, grandAVGsourcePre, grandAVGsourcePost);<br>and next interpolation<br><br> cfg = [];<br><br><br><br><br><br> cfg.voxelcoord = 'no';<br> cfg.parameter = 'mask';<br> cfg.interpmethod = 'nearest';<br> cfg.coordsys = 'mni';<br><br><br><br><br><br> mask = ft_sourceinterpolate(cfg,stat,mri);<br> statplot.mask = mask.mask;<br><br><br>and then for plotting<br><br><br><br><br><br>cfg = [];<br>cfg.method = 'slice';<br>cfg.funparameter = 'stat';<br>cfg.maskparameter = 'mask';<br> cfg.funcolorlim = [-0.1 0.1];<br> cfg.opacitylim = [-0.1 0.1];<br>figure<br>ft_sourceplot(cfg, statplot);<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>===============================================<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Best RegardsChaitanya Srinivas Lanka<br><br>Wiss. Mitarbeiter PhD Student<br><br><br><br><br><br>Functional and Restorative Neurosurgery Neural Information Processing<br>Neurosurgical University Hospital Graduate Training Center for Neuroscience<br><br><br><br><br><br>Eberhard Karls University Eberhard Karls University<br><br><br><br><br><br>Otfried-Mueller-Str.45 ?sterbergstr. 3<br><br><br><br><br><br>D-72076 Tuebingen D-72074 Tuebingen<br><br><br><br><br><br>Mobile Phone Number : <a href="tel:%2B49-176-79035731" target="_blank">+49-176-79035731</a><br>===============================================<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br><br>fieldtrip mailing list<br><br><a href="mailto:fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl</a><br><br><a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip</a><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br><br>fieldtrip mailing list<br><br><a href="mailto:fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl</a><br><br><a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip</a><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br><br>fieldtrip mailing list<br><br><a href="mailto:fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl</a><br><br><a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip</a><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br><br>fieldtrip mailing list<br><br><a href="mailto:fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl</a><br><br><a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip</a><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>fieldtrip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl</a><br><a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip</a><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <<a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140126/9c7c30c0/attachment.html" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140126/9c7c30c0/attachment.html</a>><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>Name: image.png<br>Type: image/png<br>Size: 23195 bytes<br>Desc: not available<br>URL: <<a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140126/9c7c30c0/attachment.png" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140126/9c7c30c0/attachment.png</a>><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>fieldtrip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl" target="_blank">fieldtrip@donders.ru.nl</a><br><a href="http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip" target="_blank">http://mailman.science.ru.nl/mailman/listinfo/fieldtrip</a><br><br>End of fieldtrip Digest, Vol 38, Issue 49<br>*****************************************<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>