Table 4.
Correlations between RT on the various ANT-R attentional effects and MFT RT slope.
| MFT RT slope | A | V | O | F | L | A×F | O×F | V×F | F×L | A×L | O×L | V×L | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | .21 | 1 | |||||||||||
| V | .15 | .08 | 1 | ||||||||||
| O | .10 | .18 | .44** | 1 | |||||||||
| F | .13 | .04 | .26 | .38* | 1 | ||||||||
| L | -.07 | .02 | .03 | -.26 | .15 | 1 | |||||||
| A×F | -.18 | .29 | .24 | -.10 | -.13 | .05 | 1 | ||||||
| O×F | .28 | -.28 | .15 | .12 | .09 | -.08 | -.41** | 1 | |||||
| V×F | .25 | .06 | .54** | .16 | .38* | .07 | .06 | .29 | 1 | ||||
| F×L | -.12 | .08 | .05 | -.06 | -.30* | .28 | .33* | -.02 | -.21 | 1 | |||
| A×L | 0 | .05 | -.11 | -.30* | .17 | .24 | -.11 | .04 | .01 | -.20 | 1 | ||
| O×L | -.19 | -.09 | .05 | .16 | -.01 | -.01 | -.04 | -.10 | -.09 | .28 | -.64** | 1 | |
| V×L | -.28 | -.16 | -.12 | -.10 | .29 | .12 | .03 | -.21 | -.07 | -.02 | .09 | .12 | 1 |
*
p< 0.05
**
p < 0.01; (2-tailed).
A = Alerting; V = Validity; O = Orienting time; F = Flanker Conflict; L = Location Conflict; A×F = Alerting by Flanker; O×F = Orienting by Flanker; V×F = Validity by Flanker; A×L = Alerting by Location; O×L = Orienting by Location; V×L = Validity by Location.