Skip to main content
. 2010 Sep 8;30(36):12084–12093. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0827-10.2010

Table 1.

Analysis of effect of a competing stream on the detectability of the attended stream

3 versus 6.5 Hz 4 versus 7 Hz 7 versus 10.1 Hz
Hit rate Different Different Marginally different
    Target condition p = 0.004 p = 0.0001 p = 0.06
    Slow versus fast task t = 3.93 t = 5.22 t = 2.03
False alarm Not different Not different Marginally different
    Opposite condition p = 0.11 p = 0.26 p = 0.06
    Slow versus fast task t = −1.76 t = −1.17 t = −2.05
False alarm Not different Not different Not different
    Null condition p = 0.14 p = 0.65 p = 0.58
    Slow versus fast task t = −1.6 t = −0.46 t = 0.56
False alarm Different Different Different
    Opposite task versus null p = 0.013 p = 0.01 p = 0.04
    Slow task t = 3.14 t = 2.69 t = 2.2
False alarm Different Different Different
    Opposite task versus null p = 0.03 p = 0.005 p = 0.0003
    Fast task t = 2.5 t = 3.3 t = 4.7