Table 3. Results of post-hoc comparisons computed for significant main effects and interactions obtained from the STIMULATOR STATUS × TASK × PROSODIC CATEGORY × WORD CONTENT ANOVA with accuracy rates as dependent variable.

POST-HOC ANALYSIS FOR	COMPARISON	P-VALUE
MAIN EFFECT OF TASK
	PI–SI	n.s.
	PI–VI	p<0.01
	SI–VI	p<0.05
MAIN EFFECT OF PROSODIC CATEGORY
	happy–neutral	p<0.05
	happy–angry	n.s.
	neutral–angry	n.s
PROSODIC CATEGORY × WORD CONTENT
	CT–HT	p<0.01
	CT–LT	p<0.05
	HT–LT	p<0.01
TASK × PROSODIC CATEGORY × WORD CONTENT
CT-HT-DIFFERENCES	PI–SI	n.s.
	PI–VI	p<0.01
	SI–VI	n.s.
CT-LT-DIFFERENCES	PI–SI	n.s.
	PI–VI	p<0.05
	SI–VI	n.s.
LT-HT-DIFFERENCES	PI–SI	n.s.
	PI–VI	n.s.
	SI–VI	n.s.

PI =  prosody identification, SI =  semantics identification, VI =  vowel identification; CT =  congruent trials,HT =  high conflict trials, LT =  low conflict trials, n.s. =  not significant