Table 2.
Mean d’ for intact images used in the testing sessions
| Experiment and training schedule | Testing image | Pre-test | Post-test 1 | Post-test 2 | Post-test 3 | Final test | Pre-test vs. final test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1A (N = 12) 30-image |
Trained | −0.04 | 0.67 | 0.64 | 0.95 | 1.58 | P < .001 |
| Untrained | −0.10 | 0.40 | 0.22 | 0.68 | 0.88 | P < .002 | |
|
1B (N = 12) 60-image |
Trained | 0.30 | 0.76 | 0.96 | 0.86 | 0.88 | P < .001 |
| Untrained | −0.03 | 0.47 | 0.88 | 0.48 | 1.01 | P < .007 | |
|
2 (N = 12) 60-image |
Trained | 0.18 | 0.94 | 0.49 | 1.01 | 0.68 | P = .16a |
| Untrained | −0.15 | 0.80 | 0.54 | 0.70 | 0.66 | P < .005 | |
|
3 (N = 24) 30-image |
Trained | −0.11 | Not applicable | 1.14 | P < .001 | ||
| Untrained | 0.08 | Not applicable | 0.74 | P < .001 | |||
P values show results from t tests comparing pre-test with the final post-test
aIn experiment 2, although the pre-test did not differ significantly from the final post-test, it was significantly worse than the average of all four post-tests, p < .05