Table 2.
F-values and significance levels from analyses of variance on GFP amplitudes and on ERP amplitudes at relevant electrode sites (ROIs; see Methods and Results for details).
| Source | df | Time segments | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 (80–130) | N1 (130–180) | P2/N2 (180–240) | N400 (300–500) | ||||||
| GFP | ROI | GFP | ROI | GFP | ROI | GFP | ROI | ||
| WORDS | |||||||||
| Features | 1, 23 | 4.82* | 4.31* | 4.83* | |||||
| Associates | 1, 23 | ||||||||
| Features × Associates | 1, 23 | ||||||||
| PSEUDOWORDS | |||||||||
| Features | 1, 23 | ||||||||
| Associates | 1, 23 | ||||||||
| Features × Associatets | 1, 23 | ||||||||
| ALL STIMULI | |||||||||
| Lexicality | 1, 23 | 3.42 (*) | 5.81* | 18.82*** | 16.64*** | ||||
Words were analyzed to examine influences of semantic richness; pseudowords differing in the semantic richness of the words they were derived from were analyzed analogously to control for possible contributions of sensory confounds. Analyses on all stimuli examined lexicality effects.
***
p < 0.001;
**
p < 0.01;
*
p < 0.05;
(*)
p = 0.077.