Table 3.
Evoked ERO Power Measures | Model: log(Fz), log(FCz), log(Cz), log(PCz), log(Pz) Group (N = 96; 48 NACs, 48 LTAAs) MANOVA: Error df =90 |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
EROEVK power | ||||
δ1 (1–2 Hz, 300–700ms) | ||||
MANOVA | df | Pillai-Bartlett Trace | F-value | |
5 | .147 | 3.098* | ||
MANOVA Follow-up Analyses | ||||
Univariate ANOVAs | ||||
Dependant Variables showing significance | df | Controls Mean Log Power | LTAAs Mean Log Power | Effect Size (% Variance) Group |
δ1 EROEVK power at Fz | 0.380 | 0.372 | 0.0 | |
δ1 EROEVK power at FCz | 0.522 | 0.387 | 2.8 | |
δ1 EROEVK power at Cz | 1 | 0.640 | 0.443 | 4.8* |
δ1 EROEVK power at CPz | 1 | 0.758 | 0.539 | 6.3* |
δ1 EROEVK power at Pz | 1 | 0.808 | 0.533 | 9.9** |
Discriminant Analysis | Wilks’ Lambda | % Classification Accuracy | ||
0.853* | 64.6 | |||
Predictors | Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients | |||
δ1 EROEVK power at Fz | −1.04 | |||
δ1 EROEVK powerat FCz | 1.27 | |||
δ1 EROEVK power at Cz | −0.21 | |||
δ1 EROEVK power at CPz | −0.99 | |||
δ1 EROEVK power at Pz | 1.55 | |||
| ||||
EROEVK power | ||||
δ2 (3-3 Hz, 300–700ms) | ||||
MANOVA | df | Pillai-Bartlett Trace | F-value | |
5 | .094 | 1.858 | ||
| ||||
EROEVK power | ||||
⊖1 (4–5 Hz, 200–500ms) | ||||
MANOVA | df | Pillai-Bartlett Trace | F-value | |
5 | .082 | 1.608 | ||
| ||||
EROEVK power | ||||
⊖2 (6–7 Hz, 200–400ms) | ||||
MANOVA | df | Pillai-Bartlett Trace | F-value | |
5 | .086 | 1.699 | ||
| ||||
EROEVK power | ||||
α(8–12 Hz, 100–300ms) | ||||
MANOVA | df | Pillai-Bartlett Trace | F-value | |
5 | .064 | 1.221 |
Effect is significant:
p ≤ 0.05;
p ≤ 0.01;
p ≤ 0.001.