Table 2.
SumSq | df | MeanSq | F Statistic | P Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
RM ANOVA, using interpolation | |||||
(Intercept) | 23.3373 | 1 | 23.3373 | 55.1700 | <10–4 |
Error | 3.8071 | 9 | 0.4230 | ||
(Intercept):ROI | 4.7641 | 13 | 0.3665 | 9.9297 | <10–12 |
Error(ROI) | 4.3180 | 117 | 0.0369 | ||
(Intercept):Task | 0.1433 | 1 | 0.1433 | 1.8193 | 0.2104 |
Error(Task) | 0.7090 | 9 | 0.0788 | ||
(Intercept):Relevance | 13.4705 | 1 | 13.4705 | 46.2189 | 0.0001 |
Error(Relevance) | 2.6230 | 9 | 0.2914 | ||
(Intercept):ROI:Task | 0.6030 | 13 | 0.0464 | 1.8375 | 0.0450 |
Error(ROI:Task) | 2.9535 | 117 | 0.0252 | ||
(Intercept):ROI:Relevance | 5.5957 | 13 | 0.4304 | 13.9806 | <10–17 |
Error(ROI:Relevance) | 3.6022 | 117 | 0.0308 | ||
(Intercept):Task:Relevance | 0.1618 | 1 | 0.1618 | 1.0185 | 0.3392 |
Error(Task:Relevance) | 1.4296 | 9 | 0.1588 | ||
(Intercept):ROI:Task:Relevance | 0.3903 | 13 | 0.0300 | 1.0157 | 0.4411 |
Error(ROI:Task:Relevance) | 3.4585 | 117 | 0.0296 | ||
RM ANOVA, with subject 1 removed | |||||
(Intercept) | 22.4745 | 1 | 22.4745 | 50.5309 | 0.0001 |
Error | 3.5581 | 8 | 0.4448 | ||
(Intercept):ROI | 4.7895 | 13 | 0.3684 | 9.9486 | <10–12 |
Error(ROI) | 3.8514 | 104 | 0.0370 | ||
(Intercept):Task | 0.1458 | 1 | 0.1458 | 1.6572 | 0.2340 |
Error(Task) | 0.7039 | 8 | 0.0880 | ||
(Intercept):Relevance | 13.2417 | 1 | 13.2417 | 44.5775 | 0.0002 |
Error(Relevance) | 2.3764 | 8 | 0.2970 | ||
(Intercept):ROI:Task | 0.7977 | 13 | 0.0614 | 2.5299 | 0.0047 |
Error(ROI:Task) | 2.5227 | 104 | 0.0243 | ||
(Intercept):ROI:Relevance | 5.0628 | 13 | 0.3894 | 13.4838 | <10–15 |
Error(ROI:Relevance) | 3.0038 | 104 | 0.0289 | ||
(Intercept):Task:Relevance | 0.0959 | 1 | 0.0959 | 0.5569 | 0.4769 |
Error(Task:Relevance) | 1.3779 | 8 | 0.1722 | ||
(Intercept):ROI:Task:Relevance | 0.4434 | 13 | 0.0341 | 1.0929 | 0.3734 |
Error(ROI:Task:Relevance) | 3.2455 | 104 | 0.0312 |
Data are the results of a 3-way repeated-measures (RM) ANOVA with the factors region of interest (ROI), task, and relevance, performed on the decoding results shown in Fig. 5, A and B. We were unable to define the superior precentral sulcus (sPCS) ROI in 1 of 10 subjects and used two different methods to address this missing value before running the RM ANOVA. Results are shown for both an interpolation method (see methods for details) and with all data removed corresponding to the subject who was missing sPCS (using 9/10 subjects). Bold values indicate P values that were significant at α = 0.01. For both tests, Mauchly’s test revealed that the data did not violate the assumption of sphericity, so we report uncorrected P values. df, degrees of freedom; MeanSq, mean square; SumSq, sum of squares.