Table 2.
Peak amplitudes ANOVA.
| ANOVAs on mean peak voltages | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task | Component | Mean voltage at peak (µv) | F-value | p-value | Effect-size (Eta partial square) | Observed power |
| Detection-Experiment 2 | N1 | P8: −11.63; P5: −12.30; TT: −11.03 | 6.091* | 0.005 | 0.225 | 0.865 |
| N2 | P8: −2.07; P5: −0.83; TT: −0.77 | 6.609* | 0.003 | 0.239 | 0.891 | |
| P2 | P8: 5.22; P5: 5.38; TT: 5.15 | 0.227 | 0.799 | 0.022 | 0.081 | |
| Go-NoGo-Experiment 3 | N1 | P8: −12.23; P5: −11.30; TT: −10.43 | 3.66* | 0.034 | 0.148 | 0.643 |
| P3 | P8: 9.51; P5: 8.14; TT: 7.12 | 3.85* | 0.029 | 0.155 | 0.666 | |
| Pairwise comparisons | ||||||
| (II) Interval type | (J) Interval type | Mean difference (I-J) | St. err. | p-value | 95% CI around Mean difference | |
| N1 Experiment 2 | ||||||
| P8 | P5 | 0.670 | 0.358 | 0.075 | −0.073; 1.414 | |
| TT | −0.599 | 0.351 | 0.103 | −1.329; 0.131 | ||
| P5 | TT | −1.270* | 0.382 | 0.003 | 0.475; 2.064 | |
| N2 Experiment 2 | ||||||
| P8 | P5 | −1.244* | 0.391 | 0.004 | −2.058; −0.431 | |
| TT | −1.311* | 0.440 | 0.007 | −2.226; −0.396 | ||
| P5 | TT | −0.066 | 0.385 | 0.865 | −0.867; 0.735 | |
| N1 Experiment 3 | ||||||
| P8 | P5 | −0.875 | 0.534 | 0.116 | −1.987; 0.236 | |
| TT | −1.746* | 0.791 | 0.039 | −3.391; −0.101 | ||
| P5 | TT | −0.870 | 0.582 | 0.149 | −2.08; 0.339 | |
| P3 Experiment 3 | ||||||
| P8 | P5 | 1.316 | 0.828 | 0.127 | −0.407; 3.039 | |
| TT | 2.248* | 0.870 | 0.017 | 0.438; 4.058 | ||
| P5 | TT | 0.932 | 0.738 | 0.221 | −0.603; 2.467 | |
Amplitudes at peak latencies at Fz were extracted from single subjects’ mean ERP for relevant components in Experiment 2 and 3. Peaks voltages were entered in a one-way repeated measures ANOVA with Interval type as a within-subject factor. P-values highlighted in bold are significant after Benjamini–Hochberg correction for multiple comparisons.
P8 = Octaves; P5 = Fifths; TT = Tritones.