Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Feb 2.
Published in final edited form as: Health Psychol. 2016 Aug;35(8):866–869. doi: 10.1037/hea0000350

Table 1.

Model information

Unpleasant Cues Pleasant Cues Smoking Cues
Cue Type Smoking Status x Cue Type Smoking Status x Cue Type Smoking Status x
Cue Type Cue Type Cue Type

F p F p F p F p F p F p
P1 (TF5) 6.72 .011 1.27 .263 0.82 .369 1.45 .232 0.16 .693 3.13 .081
N1 (TF7) 1.63 .205 1.74 .191 0.35 .557 0.00 .948 5.33 .023 0.04 .850
P2 (TF6) 102.01 < .001 0.31 .583 35.22 < .001 6.43 .013 0.00 .947 8.25 .005
N2 (TF4) 0.37 .542 0.49 .487 22.24 < .001 3.45 .067 1.84 .178 5.03 .028
P3 (TF2) 57.42 < .001 0.64 .425 12.45 .001 0.31 .576 22.07 < .001 5.82 .018
LPP (TF3) 61.79 < .001 1.13 .292 11.47 .001 1.02 .315 4.02 .048 2.30 .133
Slow Wave (TF1) 18.75 < .001 0.13 .721 6.71 .011 0.20 .657 8.42 .005 1.25 .266

Note. Education (centered) was included as a covariate in each analysis. Main effects of smoking status were included in the model but are not presented. Significant effects (p < .05) are bolded.