Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Psychol Sci. 2013 May 7;24(7):1104–1112. doi: 10.1177/0956797612466414

Figure 3. Results from Experiments 3 and 4.

Figure 3

A: Response times for Experiment 3a (Yale) and 3b (OSU). As in Experiment 1, participants were slower to respond to refreshed items (3a: 1069ms, 3b: 1033ms) than unrefreshed items (3a: 1053ms, 3b: 1026ms). However, in this experiment, participants were fastest (rather than slowest) to respond to novel probes (3a: 1046ms, 3b: 1022ms), likely due to changes in the probe response between Experiments 1 and 3 (see main text). B: Response times for Experiment 4. In this experiment, participants were actually faster to respond to repeated probes (1006ms) than unrepeated probes (1020ms). Responses to novel probes (1005ms) were also faster than those to unrepeated probes, but did not differ from repeated probes. Error bars in all panels were generated using Morey’s (2008) correction to Cousineau’s (2005) method for creating intuition-fitting error bars for within-subjects comparisons.