Table 9. Results of post-hoc comparisons computed for significant main effects and interactions obtained from the GROUP × TASK × PROSODIC CATEGORY × WORD CONTENT ANOVA with reaction times as dependent variable.

POST-HOC ANALYSIS FOR	COMPARISON	P-VALUE
MAIN EFFECT OF TASK
	PI–SI	p<0.05
	PI–VI	n.s.
	SI–VI	p<0.05
MAIN EFFECT OF PROSODIC CATEGORY
	happy – neutral	n.s.
	happy – angry	p<0.01
	neutral - angry	p<0.01
TASK × WORD CONTENT
MAIN EFFECT OF WORD CONTENT FOR VI	VI: pos–neg	n.s.
	VI: pos–neu	p<0.01
	VI: neg–neu	p<0.01
MAIN EFFECT OF WORD CONTENT FOR PI	PI: pos–neg	p<0.01
	PI: pos–neu	n.s.
	PI: neg–neu	p<0.01
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<0.05
	SI–VI	n.s.
CT-LT-DIFFERENCES	PI–SI	n.s.
	PI–VI	p<0.05
	SI–VI	p<0.01
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, pos =  positive, neg =  negative, neu  =  neutral,

n.s. =  not significant