[FieldTrip] ft_timelockstatistics cluster correction using ECoG data
Eric Maris
e.maris at psych.ru.nl
Sun May 4 12:33:35 CEST 2014
Hi Kristen,
If you supply ft_timelockstatistics with data containing multiple channels
it will always “correct” (this is not the best word to denote what the
method does, but let’s use it anyhow) for the number of channels. By
requesting not to do clustering in space you just achieve that a clusters
are computed in a different way (ie, assuming that the channels measure
functionally independent signals).
If you do not want correction for multiple channels, then you must analyze
the data per channel, as you did for Elec11. If you have a low number of
channels, then you could combine the permutation-based p-value with regular
Bonferroni correction (dividing the critical alpha-level by the number of
channels).
Good luck,
Eric Maris
From: Kristen Berry [mailto:kkb268 at nyu.edu]
Sent: vrijdag 2 mei 2014 22:41
To: fieldtrip at science.ru.nl
Subject: [FieldTrip] ft_timelockstatistics cluster correction using ECoG
data
Dear all,
I am using an intracranial EEG dataset to compare average high gamma power
waveforms between conditions. I want to correct for multiple comparisons
across time, but not across number of electrodes. Here is my input code:
cfg=[];
cfg.latency = [0.05 .5];
cfg.parameter = 'trial';
cfg.method = 'montecarlo';
cfg.correctm = 'cluster';
cfg.neighbours = [];
cfg.numrandomization = 1000;
cfg.statistic = 'indepsamplesT';
cfg.channel = ‘all’;
cfg.alpha = 0.05;
cfg.clusteralpha = 0.05;
cfg.tail = 0;
stats = ft_timelockstatistics(cfg, data,control);
Fieldtrip’s montecarlo reference page (
<http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/reference/ft_statistics_montecarlo>
http://fieldtrip.fcdonders.nl/reference/ft_statistics_montecarlo) says, “If
you specify an empty neighbourhood structure, clustering will only be done
in frequency and time (if available) and not over neighbouring channels.”
However, my input code corrects for the number of channels as well. As an
example, when cfg.channel = ‘all’ for ft_timelockstatistics, then Elec11 is
not significant. However, if the analysis is limited to Elec11 (cfg.channel
= 11), then Elec11 has a significant cluster.
Is there a mistake in my code that is causing this? Or is there an older
version of fieldtrip that doesn’t correct for # of channels, when
cfg.neighbours is empty? Thank you for your input!
Best regards,
Kristen
Kristen Berry
Research Assistant
NYU School of Medicine
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.science.ru.nl/pipermail/fieldtrip/attachments/20140504/1f696bbd/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the fieldtrip
mailing list