Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2013 Nov 22;107:87–92. doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2013.11.005

Table 1.

Hits, false alarms (FA) and discrimination performance (Pr) for emotionally arousing words and low arousal words that were encoded under threat of shock or safety, and tested under threat of shock or safety.

Encoding Context
Recognition Context Threat Safe

Hits FA Pr Hits FA Pr
Threat
  Emotionally arousing words .75 (.17) .24 (.17) .51 (.25) .75 (.16) .25 (.16) .51 (.23)
  Low arousal words .73 (.14) .23 (.16) .50 (.22) .73 (.15) .23 (.13) .50 (.19)
Safe
  Emotionally arousing words .77 (.14) .27 (.16) .50 (.24) .80 (.12) .22 (.17) .58 (.22)
  Low arousal words .73 (.14) .22 (.17) .50 (.21) .74 (.15) .23 (.14) .51 (.18)

Numbers in parentheses indicate standard deviation. Higher Pr values (Hits minus False Alarms) indicate better discrimination ability between old and new items.