Skip to main content
. 2016 Feb 15;4:e1677. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1677

Table 3. Summary of post hoc analyses for Experiments 3 and 4.

Per cent anger range Mean d′ gain and SEM Paired t test
Experiment 3 Incongruent [10%–20%] 0.83 ± 0.44 t = 2.29, df = 9, p = 0.048, d = 1.52
[20%–30%] 2.18 ± 0.78 t = 3.21, df = 9, p = 0.011, d = 2.14
Congruent [10%–20%] 1.47 ± 0.65 t = 2.69, df = 9, p = 0.025, d = 1.79
[20%–30%] 2.17 ± 0.86 t = 2.93, df = 9, p = 0.017, d = 1.95
Experiment 4 Incongruent [10%–20%] 1.55 ± 0.75 t = 2.53, df = 8, p = 0.035, d = 1.79
[20%–30%] 1.71 ± 0.80 t = 2.59, df = 8, p = 0.032, d = 1.83
Congruent [10%–20%] 1.40 ± 0.68 t = 2.49, df = 8, p = 0.037, d = 1.76
[20%–30%] 3.25 ± 0.79 t = 4.63, df = 8, p = 0.002, d = 3.27