Skip to main content
[Preprint]. 2023 Dec 20:2023.12.19.23298260. [Version 1] doi: 10.1101/2023.12.19.23298260

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

A: Plot of pre- and post-training OU MD in BF-trained participants (paired t-test, CI95 =0.098 to 1.2, t18 = 2.473, p = 0.023, mean of differences = 0.65±1.15). B: OU STBF pre- and post-training following BF training (paired t-test, CI95 =0.177 to 2.258, t18 = 2.458, p = 0.024, mean of differences = 1.22±2.16). C: Linear regression of MD against STBF pre-training: R2=0.9365, CI (y-intercept)=−18.28 to −16.82; post-BF training: p <0.0001; R2=0.9526, CI95(y-intercept)=−18.21 to − 16.84, p <0.0001. D: Plot of pre- and post-training OU MD in IF-trained participants (paired t-test, CI95 =−0.3284 to 0.6284, t18 = 0.6587, p = 0.5184, mean of differences = 1.5±0.9926). E: OU STBF pre- and post-training following IF training (paired t-test, CI95 =−0.1917 to 0.8655, t18 = 1.339, p = 0.1972, mean of differences = 0.3369±1.097). F: Linear regression of MD against STBF pre-training: R2=0.963, CI95(y-intercept)=−17.04 to −15.87; post-IF training: p <0.0001; R2=0.9481, CI95(y-intercept)=−17.67 to −16.08, p <0.0001). ns: not statistically significant.