Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Dec 14.
Published in final edited form as: J Mem Lang. 2009 Apr 1;60(3):329–350. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2008.12.002.

Table 9.

Results of univariate ANOVAs for serial recognition of tongue twisters (Experiment 4).a

Tongue twister Position Tongue twister × Position
Serial recognition
Accuracy F1(1,19) = 39.30, p < .001 F1(3,57) = 10.49, p < .001 F1(3,57) = 4.78, p < .01
F2(1,111) = 23.86, p < .001 F2(3,333) = 8.27, p < .001 F2(3,333) = 4.86, p < .01
minF′(1,91) = 14.85, p < .001 minF′(3,230) = 4.62, p < .01 minF′(3,192) = 2.41, p = .07
Reaction time F1(1,19) = 87.66, p < .001 F1(3,57) = 61.32, p < .001 F1(3,57) = 48.55, p < .001
F2(1,111) = 1.64, p > .20 F2(3,333) = 34.23, p < .001 F2(3,333) = 0.43, p > .70
minF′(1,115) = 1.61, p > .2 minF′(3,198) = 21.97, p < .001 minF′(3,150) = 0.43, p > .5
a

Bold font indicates a significant difference (p < .05); Italic font indicates a trend towards significance (.05 < p < .10).