Skip to main content
. 2019 Aug 25;24:101992. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101992

Table 2|.

Intervention group comparisons on primary outcome measures.

Measure (sample size) Pre-training
Post-training
Active vs. Control post- vs. Pre-training t-test
Repeated measures ANOVA
Active
Control
Active
Control
Condition
Time
Time × Condition
Group × Time × Condition
m sd m sd m sd m sd diff se p 95% CI T F p F p F p F p
Guilt: ATL-SCC regression effect (n = 28) 0.14 0.55 0.15 0.64 0.12 0.43 0.18 0.46 0.05 0.30 0.88 −0.56 to.65 0.2 1.9 0.18 0.008 0.93 0.11 0.75 5.6 0.03*
Indignation: ATL-SCC regression effect (n = 28) 0.40 0.60 0.06 0.53 0.13 0.42 0.28 0.36 0.50 0.25 0.07 −0.04 to 1 1.9
Guilt vs. Indignation: ATL-SCC regression effect (n = 28) −0.26 0.38 0.09 0.40 −0.01 0.28 −0.10 0.38 −0.43 0.18 0.03* −0.81 to −0.06 −2.4

*Significant at p = .05, 2-sided. n = 14 in each group. Between-group Cohen's d scores were computed from the means and pooled standard deviations (Cohen, 1988) of the differences between Post vs. Pre-training. Mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were taken from independent samples t-test for differences between Post vs. Pre-training. CI = confidence interval, m = mean, sd = standard deviation, se = standard error, diff = difference of means, d = Cohen's d. For a graphical depiction of the values reported in this table, please see Supplementary Fig. 5. The ACTIVE group had a significantly lower ATL-SCC regression effect for guilt vs. indignation prior to training compared with the CONTROL group (diff = 0.35, se = 0.15, p = .03, 95% CI:0.045 to 0.66), and there was a weak trend towards higher regression effects for indignation in the ACTIVE vs. CONTROL group prior to training (diff = −0.34, se = 0.21, p = .13, 95% CI:−0.77 to 0.10) with no group differences in ATL-SCC regression effects for guilt (diff = 0.01, se = 0.23, p = .95, 95% CI: −0.45 to 0.48).