Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Sep 17.
Published in final edited form as: Neuroimage. 2010 Sep 25;54(2):1455–1464. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.09.049

Table 1.

Summary Statistics (mean and SD) for experimental stimuli

Orth.Neigh. Big.Freq.
Regular 4(11)a 560(292)c
Irregular 1.2(1.5)b 2426(5810)d
Pseudo 3(4.5)a 1026(987)c

Orth.Neigh.: Orthographic Neighborhood Size, Big.Freq.: Bigram Frequency The One-Way ANOVA?s predicting Orthographic Neighborhood Size (F(2, 125)=11) and Bigram Frequency (F(2, 125)=3.6) were statistically significant. Note, levels of the factor (regular, irregular, pseudo words) with different superscript letters are significantly different at p<.05 based on Scheffe post-hoc tests.