External Email - Use Caution
That makes sense! And if we wanted to identify brain regions associated with
valence (across self/non-self) that is unique from condition 2, can we add a
5th condition? Maybe we can code self as 2 and non-self as 1 so that condition
2 (self*valence) would be different from condition 5 (valence ratings only)?
Incredibly helpful, Doug- thank you so much!
From: <freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu> on behalf of "Douglas N. Greve"
<dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: Freesurfer support list <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 7:38 AM
To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu" <freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] FSFAST first level covariates
Oh, I think I see now. In realty, each trial is either self or not self and
then you have a separate valence measure, so your coding should be
1. Self-offset
2. SelfValence
3. NoSelf-offset
4. NoSelfValence
Where 1+2 are used for a self event and 3+4 are used for a noself event. If you
want to test for the difference between self and noself valence slope, then you
would just use -a 2 -c 4
On 8/29/2022 12:08 PM, Angela Fang wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
Great, thanks so much Doug- this setup makes sense to me. However, isn’t it a
problem that the brain regions associated with the contrast for -a 3 and the
contrast for -a 4 would be the same for trials that subjects rate as 1
(self-relevant) vs 0 (not self-relevant)? Could we code it as 2 (self-relevant)
and 1 (not self-relevant)?
Many thanks!!
From:
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
on behalf of "Douglas N. Greve"
<dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Sunday, August 28, 2022 at 1:07 PM
To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] FSFAST first level covariates
I was under the impression that Self and Valence were ratings from the same
event (in that mail archive, they were different events and so needed different
offsets). If Self and Valence are from the same event, then you would have
something like
1. Offset
2. Self
3. Valence
4. Self*Valence
I've never tried the interaction (self*valence). You might have to demean
before computing the product
On 8/14/2022 4:58 PM, Angela Fang wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
The two coding schemes are different because the second one does include the
self*valence variable you’re talking about, whereas the first one doesn’t. I
only included the 2nd offset because you suggested to someone else to include
it (see MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from
"secure-web.cisco.com" claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1axFb8Uk3EidN7RU3PxCMFcOtbS8C3cmNULxUDXhNgudqc2v-5LUyAYUUUC6m-FcwrPwdVKy2Y7n8DAVcyRmfV5k4NWvno0aemc07RzaIinRQ8-6_FFiXeiHdOzhbARiwJyY4xdCGKBBbKJGuolxWhUQ5ZaDv2NtX0TJ7BmyhFTGOFw4S9sp6o7il_xApboosWIOBOJb1zh7hBwMks3eFrd04OkImYWLahgGjjS7Zs4BjsQy1dYPiBCXK_vv2cHadYnHraA451p-pjerGjuvaFs9cp4jm03dcia0ilLlFFYK5n74UApp-Da_ShPd4EN_o7az4F96Vwm7OtA1A2eemJw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg19957.html<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1UvSz7SvjZnlE1QfkdS-VBc1GzXeZMYqUcsOqE3dGoo43anjoKIpvfs4NnozgTlCx23dB10wC_oFWTi8Zyazh1v1oufO7QQBf9hJanKAiwbu0cr4NfMvGMSOSaaOt5nSATHi-J-55MTqcCUhjz8_rRM1YuYWhtxzDVrlNJ5mD3QlEmdQlhRlYoneii_5mWjAZB1gcbpR_0Zl1nUaCy9BfmpcQRNLpIdfE1NMjg7OnqHOX5jAdPz1gGqxVTKgstTqx8RhxmTkDYOQPLc6hC3by-Atu2VfBnloD3GbZOzG04LjV1Of0uYaB6pk6oSsZFULTsifcwPSiwh1m9gKSg5lD7Q/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg19957.html>).
If we don’t need it, would it just be 2 conditions, as follows?
1. SelfOffset
2. Self*ValenceSlope
But then I’m not clear how to get the main effect of valence (brain regions
that scale with increasing emotion valence, while holding self-relevance
constant)?
From:
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
on behalf of "Douglas N. Greve"
<dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 1:37 PM
To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] FSFAST first level covariates
Those look like they are the same coding scheme. What is different? You can
only have one offset. The Self vs Valence -a 2 -a 4 is not testing for an
interaction. If you want an interaction you have to create a new variable which
is SelfRating*ValenceRating.
On 8/10/2022 2:38 PM, Angela Fang wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
Hello,
Just re-sending my question below. If I have a variable with 2 levels (yes/no)
and another variable that is continuous, based on this post (MailScanner has
detected a possible fraud attempt from "secure-web.cisco.com" claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1axFb8Uk3EidN7RU3PxCMFcOtbS8C3cmNULxUDXhNgudqc2v-5LUyAYUUUC6m-FcwrPwdVKy2Y7n8DAVcyRmfV5k4NWvno0aemc07RzaIinRQ8-6_FFiXeiHdOzhbARiwJyY4xdCGKBBbKJGuolxWhUQ5ZaDv2NtX0TJ7BmyhFTGOFw4S9sp6o7il_xApboosWIOBOJb1zh7hBwMks3eFrd04OkImYWLahgGjjS7Zs4BjsQy1dYPiBCXK_vv2cHadYnHraA451p-pjerGjuvaFs9cp4jm03dcia0ilLlFFYK5n74UApp-Da_ShPd4EN_o7az4F96Vwm7OtA1A2eemJw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg19957.html<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1S2s08xk6_r2FFsEB5S1KdOcfq6G8ToJwyZuNFONdwgOYd87JJkB-uznJW2pelg24KQwX3lweVOmFs99TCKitjbJOqKWgEH_UW7wir5JQ113csODerDntanBrEibOdt6Mxs2QeQ5D7n69Ds6NaOSOJIbLFeMjuoaTXCkNccNydn7jvjmVd0zW2YhEXG9JtLxMNVIYt8q48ZK0sJUt8sjTP6xuCzA1pzB19MUHA078Zgygtns0YVgn1n5Sg41ZbVZ3jWciX5ZF34AejW5nWj1Z4mWO1Xyd_7RwNbKkVMPeDwG6K9W59gzBf_t0G-AzmUhxGC8zfKM0bxA9hhZv4GR2BQ/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg19957.html>),
it sounds like I should code as follows:
1. SelfOffset
2. Self-ValenceSlope (would the weight in the 4th column reflect the value
of self multiplied by the value of valence for this participant?)
3. NonSelfOffset
4. NonSelf-ValenceSlope
If the other way of modifying the paradigm file is also acceptable to test the
interaction (as I describe below), that would also be helpful to know.
Thanks!
Angela
From:
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
on behalf of Angela Fang <angf...@uw.edu><mailto:angf...@uw.edu>
Reply-To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Monday, August 1, 2022 at 4:35 PM
To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] FSFAST first level covariates
External Email - Use Caution
Hi Doug,
Nevermind to my first question! I read this post (MailScanner has detected a
possible fraud attempt from "secure-web.cisco.com" claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1x486JnVcuVKZFlKc9lnM17mkutiyvGdWJ7I2FV8fwW_DW3coauzdEYjTthPWCuUI49R8eR7JdFGVDEm-PGd9Gp03GX15R1fQSmiF_Oa0GSUysb9oU2BILoHtXNRTr2wYopYLEgZzR0uHoS42fJD6Y6OgxNPab4zkRakvC9SczCpOmDIjix_3coBjxNyEGBZxGeQ43psRUWNXcOqObLo5i75Sk5As8_8hlVX0lY3Nhlg6GpZxPNxznyC2k4HTCODw-faGH-b0xy25IwE7YN7YmWgVADwyzJ3Ra2p48FjTCCD90Yn7ggECXgkApxbdwYhEozkxSvgygst9PXkZBXgH3g/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg32235.html<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1646ymi0_yM9ab72e81bZdCKw_zNbXr9RihxDaiDVPq0_Qd4EXYgDmO56zQdi9l_AyV3uyyiURXHoYWQmiu56CbMuIGdZz8EH0gbsnVrAz9KwunZAwLzh0kh-jzVwHtlbEdd1ExEJYHT7o7JtUWg2GM484JTyL0VZJymRuGRyD0ag1nQ_0BPPjQHxPCqNHEU4Y_seBsq9XsUROgyR-bX-tHVXxhshVUHgneudw6tEB2lIVYfYrL3srRbjy1QN9Bq_e3_WaNCDhkXdixnae24i41HHYwJfn3KwsmNoZ2RxLoh3SMkXXwVntAewl8PeldBY0s3UxoEPiFbDdXXuJLUjlw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg32235.html>)
and realized that we always include a subject-specific par file in each run
for first-level analyses.
However, I’m still confused about how to modify my paradigm file. I also need
to model the trials of non-interest, so would it be as follows?
0 1 2.5 1.0 SelfOffset
0 2 2.5 1.0 SelfSlope (equal to
subject’s rating of self-relevance)
0 3 2.5 1.0 ValenceOffset
0 4 2.5 3.0 ValenceSlope (equal to
subject’s rating of valence)
2.5 0 2.5 1.0 FIXATION
5.0 1 2.5 1.0 SelfOffset
5.0 2 2.5 0 SelfSlope (equal to
subject’s rating of self-relevance, in this case subject responded 0, or
non-relevant)
5.0 3 2.5 1.0 ValenceOffset
5.0 4 2.5 2.0 ValenceSlope (equal to
subject’s rating of valence)
7.5 5 2.5 1.0 OTHER
Do these contrasts look correct to you?
Self vs Fixation -a 1 -c 0 (main effect of self)
Valence vs Fixation -a 3 -c 0 (main effect of valence)
Self vs Valence -a 2 -a 4 (interaction between self x valence)
Thank you so much for your help!
Angela
From:
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
on behalf of Angela Fang <angf...@uw.edu><mailto:angf...@uw.edu>
Reply-To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 1:02 PM
To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] FSFAST first level covariates
Thanks Doug. This wiki page is extremely helpful. However, my question is about
individual subject responses. I could see how you could include a summary
(e.g., average) value of the parametric variable across subjects in your
“weight” column but it’s not clear to me how you could integrate individual
subject responses to each word in the parametric modulation paradigm file? I’m
imagining something like the FSGD file where a value is given for each subject,
but for first-level analysis.
We have a similar design as someone else who posted a similar question
(MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "secure-web.cisco.com"
claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1axFb8Uk3EidN7RU3PxCMFcOtbS8C3cmNULxUDXhNgudqc2v-5LUyAYUUUC6m-FcwrPwdVKy2Y7n8DAVcyRmfV5k4NWvno0aemc07RzaIinRQ8-6_FFiXeiHdOzhbARiwJyY4xdCGKBBbKJGuolxWhUQ5ZaDv2NtX0TJ7BmyhFTGOFw4S9sp6o7il_xApboosWIOBOJb1zh7hBwMks3eFrd04OkImYWLahgGjjS7Zs4BjsQy1dYPiBCXK_vv2cHadYnHraA451p-pjerGjuvaFs9cp4jm03dcia0ilLlFFYK5n74UApp-Da_ShPd4EN_o7az4F96Vwm7OtA1A2eemJw/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg19957.html<https://secure-web.cisco.com/11nFbIrJYBqRI1W_4wY-HvfdEF3GG6xLL8So8t0i9yKbcElVyl_nJoDI6XedAGY2kKd_eP-dnsWeccOw2qajd375GRCeiUjqaXv3C7vOkrGEOiSiqfcPQ9y73ROdtl0jJIGemdoYQDd3GcX-dKx6qDwBcPE_qNlqxB0ZTcsDfTwK88OkoVtftMo1zKBWSiZBV9p0GO2erUcSoXtVI-AITDr9jULRDzVL_IzxtPdtuSBrYXMASRi7ex2oKftjJjyG_HMgygf_ULhSYIsHviihCwfx4uO5_zrvh8H84AxAsv33zsFjOaYeZ826JkD3E99hxrAKW3jYr3PjfN-zNZjQLJA/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Ffreesurfer%40nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmsg19957.html>).
We have an event-related experiment presenting trait adjectives in terms of
whether they describe themselves (SELF condition) or someone else (OTHER
condition). We are interested in testing a 2x2 ANOVA to examine an interaction
between self-relevance x emotional valence. Assuming you can’t integrate
individual subject responses to each word in the paradigm file, would we set it
up as follows?
“Usual” paradigm file:
0 1 2.5 1.0 SELF
2.5 0 2.5 1.0 FIXATION
5.0 1 2.5 1.0 SELF
7.5 2 2.5 1.0 OTHER
Parametric modulation paradigm file:
0 1 2.5 1.0 SELFoffset
0 2 2.5 0.8 SELFslope
0 3 2.5 1.0 VALENCEoffset
0 4 2.5 2.0 VALENCEslope
(where 0.8 reflects the percentage of time the word was endorsed as
self-relevant and 2.0 is the average valence rating given for that word)
And then create a contrast of 2 vs 4 to test the interaction? Would testing
contrast 1 vs 0 be a test of the main effect of self-relevance and contrast 3
vs 0 the main effect of valence?
Thanks so much for your help!
Angela
From:
<freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer-boun...@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
on behalf of "Douglas N. Greve"
<dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:dgr...@mgh.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: Freesurfer support list
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Date: Thursday, July 28, 2022 at 10:25 AM
To: "freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu"<mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
<freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu><mailto:freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Freesurfer] FSFAST first level covariates
Yes, see MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from
"secure-web.cisco.com" claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1xgmi0XbR7WrIE4BfzR740s181TIOvSTjcUq-Rk-z13hN0I7vbz62UFJzTYFZj4wZVY2Sna5RnnbUjdr5rdIrZ8HDdlElBXpvLJlLSrxp2yAkKl7HfFEL-j-Kkw2BKgfSGD7NvIslM4TXihBlZBs6fJAuz3p1utmaUhi9QpKMWPxqA-IEdkDwMOxBp63Nz46T-lRqHDlx-mb3U89aJIZwphQAhfrw_sJ4v37K9rMY67crxig6wihKdHsmpUQB8d3xR1MmckR-Km8m6hC76s8DrPE1D77X0TmcEFds_nh3GFvqi2IO6gU0t7M-ga0JA6aQhoD1K13eSkwfZKtN3atabg/https%3A%2F%2Fsurfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Ffswiki%2FFsFastParametricModulation<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1vlnv3wLgT6AWyuomHXVnJCfD3bAT8O6KYN-6kv4DVE_Kbs9JwI6WLDqHM7UN7cfJ1TP0eQKgCtR-KXf01ehJnqsV2jW5XmAXQr0QnOlGk4--dT54zncT2aoK1njMKmN9ayqCJ_tFar2vbW-JGXSkTcg6gdUPh_mngiG7m6SxtOvACvAKVHKQXKhe7-xx2QsCh6VDDkv9vQZNEkvMseg2bTElAE9tBG4Nyws1TeLoT6NRejWCSL4Hnke9bOJGLYp7gY561tg-SfXXlzjCNawo6cgCBAIxSsMzwLR8sWZndlid_nZ0aZqf85_HgcVXWUXEoKCbQCJ_Hs2G69KcjGr8yg/https%3A%2F%2Fsurfer.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Ffswiki%2FFsFastParametricModulation>
On 7/25/2022 6:56 PM, Angela Fang wrote:
External Email - Use Caution
Hi Freesurfer community,
I have run participants through an event-related fMRI task in which subjects
rate whether trait adjectives are descriptive of themselves or not, and
afterwards asked them to rate each trait word on emotional valence. Is it
possible to include these individual level subjective ratings of emotional
valence as covariates in the first level contrast in FSFAST? If so, how?
Thanks,
Angela
---
Angela Fang, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Psychology
University of Washington
Lab website: MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from
"secure-web.cisco.com" claiming to be
http://secure-web.cisco.com/1jmqvstywIOSDQi7lL5fFrNGMQ7tbzvHu9YyNypnTBOqEwq6KUNH6DmzK5JX7bXvVq8WFqeSmilTSSt9wbiNbdjSmjLIWsn7gcw4ximKLeo5S6_Ehl8thj_qhtBFZSqaKZk9x4_2recBxPdFjO-OKw0NaAJYZtkxldrIAWsFDqC2KJsJ2u42yGc5g_jeETN6ZF3CDDTGlAweEAqGgAiwd8ncu0Qrii1cMC3oiVx-Ch_wz1NA-AoQ4K5f3SrYTT3U_IENroDi4xEi7R57J42aJFkVCmRiQx7uk0noJSoJl7GbKvnGuX7fDYjOuARTMcjXNeH7of5UA16E1sINLAPWKcQ/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uwconnectlab.com<http://secure-web.cisco.com/1EJiZPvng9zcCEb0OA91-g6prvoE6x8E2RuCN3eRqnJvVyWnOZIhlVqHUDwmp2WEJbpju-V9f5K_n7JLkG1IXMgF6ntSJr6Aa91zEsfied2HyjVTkJZCXxMUYkbVQwHF0Z6PuuEgJy0xZF4iWLQMnW1WHJWnTXmRF8Gn92JXWkNX3veeq3YElwnE8vUuXUBgXGmmFtbKV7dJKfvdquLkJq0ApBJuwyNBrhKCoiBCQx4GIbuAfZ0iAsH5aL5xid2f1julAWTaA4EyB2BlTn9hUZcuoJNQPs89B-fNI4SA4inRY7YD67lmo-MehxlSgl0xO/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uwconnectlab.com>
Pronouns: she, her, hers
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "secure-web.cisco.com"
claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1YVm7hDB3GJiC8FqZUeSmNQqYOZano_RsH2quxJj481AlntnLRefYlE9kjoEeGt-gqA6RsAdbgjPhr3wwZfx4rEgRXoj06J-SGFMFiSbQLbKYPSby80T2idt0EoIdV3oj2GH7OUEl7nsmsIv9UQJ9mSBowr4LnVf1hWw2T6XlHKGCWFm6ZZPo0Q8dmsDjQkiGFJlwXLfpOaOBBX0O_C7M2inizHY1H8wESXwUCYCCFhhRo8U4dKBB3RQmfV2SsWReXAEHulIBsXU0p5URqQNItB8GESOZHTsc0pvkguOY-7Vn0f0vtsEEW74WljePRe3NnEbhSgMX5B39AnuNTWqr_A/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1EIAJa3Vy8ViZunXEQlBqUeh89Z7hfnnmjv7DeFVsTGR2Flz9jn4bCu1dyuSCsHExp1254fEb-3HSfv_I0wnhZVOmxSlCgQ5W60PZLZ4fD7viMK9Vd4bddOCe3voLZt-bfajyrS85ddBk6F4OSk79smF2rXnEb0HPuZuwRHA1trnMRnDI6lw5vKTMZDtUpQ-uTFSKEWRF8-za7m4KgVPY3fvUsg_Vbe7BdVSF7LLb3z9K_jpTuId2AnuH3bM3sjJBCDBRuN-o1kc7VbRHE3c8w26Oh-Q_23VPqL5zPdyWBydZK2cexYD7WJa7ADaeuH6LHpS-9wtePP21o-y_utC43A/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer>
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "secure-web.cisco.com"
claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1YVm7hDB3GJiC8FqZUeSmNQqYOZano_RsH2quxJj481AlntnLRefYlE9kjoEeGt-gqA6RsAdbgjPhr3wwZfx4rEgRXoj06J-SGFMFiSbQLbKYPSby80T2idt0EoIdV3oj2GH7OUEl7nsmsIv9UQJ9mSBowr4LnVf1hWw2T6XlHKGCWFm6ZZPo0Q8dmsDjQkiGFJlwXLfpOaOBBX0O_C7M2inizHY1H8wESXwUCYCCFhhRo8U4dKBB3RQmfV2SsWReXAEHulIBsXU0p5URqQNItB8GESOZHTsc0pvkguOY-7Vn0f0vtsEEW74WljePRe3NnEbhSgMX5B39AnuNTWqr_A/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1kpvIURIF86fQFDWvoqFqGbAI26mDoO1l2wT0G81LGdkV67kjYUgecIaFvo7MFPqYyxgDEs2XDYD5OMVatlurlEpOuw39MYKT4ptAGi6oG9elRrohfOxEkYwMfrkQYF0Bejt06PkUI2Gpy-jr8G9VBAC1Kn-Un8yRxjrqL7q5qzMyblUKiXxUkbswTMq7AejCS0qxUMZE35LH07vxfV6rhgdvfslyIk1rfD_ollHWd5ujp-K7DU1mPld0wBfpRP2smmaVKpViLcpDvEzWATqNXcLyPl8CDoPHdiZ_OPLE_8p9xed9SeN2d_CGvKkwS9RheoDF23zctN6cWmCAAiXlkQ/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer>
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "secure-web.cisco.com"
claiming to be
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1YVm7hDB3GJiC8FqZUeSmNQqYOZano_RsH2quxJj481AlntnLRefYlE9kjoEeGt-gqA6RsAdbgjPhr3wwZfx4rEgRXoj06J-SGFMFiSbQLbKYPSby80T2idt0EoIdV3oj2GH7OUEl7nsmsIv9UQJ9mSBowr4LnVf1hWw2T6XlHKGCWFm6ZZPo0Q8dmsDjQkiGFJlwXLfpOaOBBX0O_C7M2inizHY1H8wESXwUCYCCFhhRo8U4dKBB3RQmfV2SsWReXAEHulIBsXU0p5URqQNItB8GESOZHTsc0pvkguOY-7Vn0f0vtsEEW74WljePRe3NnEbhSgMX5B39AnuNTWqr_A/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1baPxzF3OOPXMGMKlDUSToUGtXmZmXs1NV_eR9tJozBEesYxYl4BPvyM-dh7LBWCb7khf-uECadRZwtCvQJ-Y8v5UKWYVxnuvYakLo0u3pWD5fFwaEvMS1db4fhFfyfI_klxJRpmUTHzOOORzQYhBlxcouqCUAGbwl1T-7IMbZBTJLBWA9xD8j1GRSjaaDh3qoIXRI7ScaoKF_j5qBsSzOG3WVi0L0jqJPJ30zhrQ3wRV1Tr4Pvpz2J9ZmbLIzIc7dyDMvU7mLa9KUb3x0CV9UD-xevTdnaB4e9AeTz7CCFUi3dF2t4fUZDRo4Vsu0i3NpJrzzLFnXE_zwLgsS_zAJg/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer>
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu<mailto:Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu>
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1YVm7hDB3GJiC8FqZUeSmNQqYOZano_RsH2quxJj481AlntnLRefYlE9kjoEeGt-gqA6RsAdbgjPhr3wwZfx4rEgRXoj06J-SGFMFiSbQLbKYPSby80T2idt0EoIdV3oj2GH7OUEl7nsmsIv9UQJ9mSBowr4LnVf1hWw2T6XlHKGCWFm6ZZPo0Q8dmsDjQkiGFJlwXLfpOaOBBX0O_C7M2inizHY1H8wESXwUCYCCFhhRo8U4dKBB3RQmfV2SsWReXAEHulIBsXU0p5URqQNItB8GESOZHTsc0pvkguOY-7Vn0f0vtsEEW74WljePRe3NnEbhSgMX5B39AnuNTWqr_A/https%3A%2F%2Fmail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffreesurfer
_______________________________________________
Freesurfer mailing list
Freesurfer@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
https://mail.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/freesurfer
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 Mass General Brigham
Compliance HelpLine at https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/complianceline
<https://www.massgeneralbrigham.org/complianceline> .
Please note that this e-mail is not secure (encrypted). If you do not wish to
continue communication over unencrypted e-mail, please notify the sender of
this message immediately. Continuing to send or respond to e-mail after
receiving this message means you understand and accept this risk and wish to
continue to communicate over unencrypted e-mail.
