Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2009 Jan;35(1):74–91. doi: 10.1037/a0012926

Table 2.

Average DMTS accuracy during baseline and disruption in Experiment 2, average proportions of baseline in each of three resistance tests, and results of one-tailed t-tests (3df) of differences in proportion of baseline between SO and DO components with significant differences in boldface. The magnitude of the DOE – the difference between accuracy levels in DO and SO components – is shown in a separate column. Also shown are rates of pecking at samples S1 and S2 in the SO and DO components.

Accuracy of discrimination -- log d Sample pecking -- resp/min
Comparison disruption Comparison disruption
SO DO DOE SO S1 SO S2 DO S1 DO S2
Baseline 1.253 1.768 0.515 57.2 65.6 59.1 43.8
Disrupt 1.166 1.315 0.149 61.2 70.5 60.7 43.5
Prop. BL 0.944 0.748
t-test results t = 2.28, p = .054
Retention interval disruption Retention interval disruption
SO DO SO S1 SO S2 DO S1 DO S2
Baseline 1.404 1.689 0.285 58.6 70.3 60.7 40.1
Disrupt 1.075 1.159 0.084 58.1 68.7 57.7 45.6
Prop. BL 0.808 0.677
t-test results t = 1.15, p = .167
Sample disruption Sample disruption
SO DO SO S1 SO S2 DO S1 DO S2
Baseline 1.410 1.896 0.486 62.2 59.3 63.9 43.3
Disrupt 1.435 1.592 0.157 47.3 51.1 47.0 27.5
Prop. BL 1.032 0.845
t-test results t = 2.83, p = .033