Skip to main content

Table 3 Summary of results of the ANCOVAs performed for each ERP component using the peak latency and peak amplitude data

From: Development of the time course for processing conflict: an event-related potentials study with 4 year olds and adults

 

N1

N2

P3

LPC

 

F

df

F

df

F

df

F

df

Peak Latency

Group (G)

31.7***

1, 29

58.1***

1, 29

57.53***

1, 29

  

Flanker (F)

4.41*

1, 30

<1

1, 30

8.09**

1, 30

8.37*

1, 13

Channel (Ch)

<1

1.5, 43.9

<1

1.5, 46.1

<1

1.8, 53.8

1.66

1.5, 19.2

G × F

<1

1, 29

<1

1, 30

1.31

1, 30

  

G × Ch

3.17#

1.5, 43.9

<1

1.5, 46.1

1.22

1.8, 53.8

  

F × Ch

2.49

1.6, 48.6

1.37

1.5, 45

1.78

2, 60

3.13#

2, 26

G × F × Ch

<1

1.6, 48.6

1.16

1.5, 45

<1

2, 60

  

Peak Amplitude

Group (G)

27.67***

1, 29

24.49***

1, 29

1.02

1, 29

  

Flanker (F)

3.33#

1, 30

<1

1, 30

2.69

1, 30

3.54#

1, 13

Channel (Ch)

<1

1.7, 52.3

3.07#

2, 60

15.63***

1.6, 47.6

<1

2, 26

G × F

1.75

1, 30

<1

1, 30

4.13*

1, 30

  

G × Ch

3.46*

1.7, 52.3

<1

2, 60

1.71

1.6, 47.6

  

F × Ch

<1

2, 60

1.26

2, 60

1.31

1.6, 48.7

2.84

1.4, 18.5

G × F × Ch

<1

2, 60

<1

2, 60

1.72

1.6, 48.7

  
  1. The number of segments used to compute the averaged ERPs was included as a covariate to account for group differences. Significance of effects: *** p < .001; ** p < .01; * p < .05; # p < .10.
Back to article page

BMC Neuroscience

ISSN: 1471-2202

Contact us