Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Psychophysiology. 2016 Mar 21;53(7):991–1007. doi: 10.1111/psyp.12646

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics for time 1 (T1) and time 2 (T2) (left) and age-related linear mixed-effects (LME) regression results (right) for task accuracy, reaction time, and ERP amplitude measures for the Oddball/Novelty, Go/Nogo, and Flanker tasks.

Group means Effect of age LME regression
T1 T2
Mean SD Mean SD B2 SE p

Accuracy (%)
Oddball/Novelty 94.19 9.15 96.63 5.96 2.20 .59 <.001 *
Go/Nogo 91.80 6.20 94.93 4.50 2.79 .36 <.001 *
Flanker 93.20 7.79 96.30 5.19 2.51 .52 <.001 *
Reaction time (milliseconds)
Oddball/Novelty 902.78 128.55 866.75 125.66 −27.61 9.37 .004 *
Go/Nogo 417.71 80.11 448.99 79.66 24.80 5.50 <.001 *
Flanker 526.97 75.53 540.50 67.04 10.29 5.40 .060
Amplitude (microvolts)
Oddball/Novelty
Novelty-P3a 5.75 8.74 4.87 7.76 −.58 .50 .254
Oddball-P3b 18.88 7.86 16.10 6.90 −2.98 .47 <.001 *
Go/Nogo
Go-N2 −.53 4.21 −.62 3.63 −.16 .24 .509
Nogo-N2 −1.08 5.68 −1.36 5.66 −.15 .28 .608
Go-P3 8.12 3.51 6.18 3.23 −1.74 .23 <.001 *
Nogo-P3 14.37 5.70 11.68 5.37 −2.25 .39 <.001 *
Go-CRN 1.13 4.13 .12 3.97 −.77 .32 .018
Nogo-ERN −5.51 6.57 −6.59 7.40 −1.21 .56 .032
Nogo-Pe 12.16 8.36 10.88 10.61 −1.34 .68 .052
Flanker
Congruent-N2 −1.85 4.04 −1.33 3.79 .23 .27 .400
Incongruent-N2 −1.96 4.09 −1.15 3.83 .43 .27 .124
Congruent-P3 13.30 4.69 10.55 4.68 −2.41 .32 <.001 *
Incongruent-P3 15.14 5.35 12.74 5.35 −2.19 .35 <.001 *
Flanker-CRN 2.78 4.77 1.69 4.88 −.74 .36 .042
Flanker-ERN −.88 5.76 −2.21 6.62 −1.27 .50 .013
Flanker-Pe 17.40 9.53 14.61 11.51 −1.91 .87 .030
ERP factors (standard deviations)
P3-F .24 .99 −.25 .96 −46 .06 <.001 *
N2-F −.05 .95 .01 1.00 .07 .05 .192
RN-F .14 .94 −.06 1.01 −.16 .07 .019

Note: The three bottom-most rows display values for factors extracted using principal components analysis reflecting primary dimensions of variance in ERP amplitude scores (see Methods). Of the forty-eight families that participated across the two sessions (mean age at T1 = 15.5 years [SD = .9]; T2 = 16.4 years [SD = .9]), available ERP scores (see text) for the different tasks and accuracies differed slightly: Go/Nogo incorrect at T1 = 92; Go/Nogo correct at T1 = 92; Go/Nogo incorrect at T2 = 95; Go/Nogo correct at T2 = 96; Flanker incorrect at T1 = 91; Flanker correct at T1 = 94; Flanker incorrect at T2 = 93; Flanker correct at T2 = 96. Coefficients (B2) from LME models depict the average rate of change associated with a one-year increase in age, accompanied by standard errors (SEs) and significance-values (p).

*

Indicates the p-value falls below the .01 cutoff adopted for this study.