Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 3;11:606873. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2020.606873

Table 5.

Group comparison at POST4.

Updating intervention Inhibition intervention
Active control intervention

Young adults (baseline)
Characteristic n = 27 n = 25 n = 28 p-values n = 30 p-values
Inhibition composite measure 0.2 ± 0.5 0.2 ± 0.7 0.3 ± 0.7 0.75 0.8 ± 0.4 0.00***
   Victoria Stroop IF index (3rd plate/1st plate) 1.9 ± 0.3 1.9 ± 0.5 1.8 ± 0.4 0.70 1.6 ± 0.3 0.00**
   Anti-saccade (range 0–90) 62.5 ± 21.4 62.9 ± 20.2 62.5 ± 21.4 0.93 78.1 ± 12.8 0.00**
Updating composite measure 0.2 ± 0.4 0.2 ± 0.6 0.1 ± 0.7 0.84 0.7 ± 0.8 0.00**
   Keep track (range 0–24) 15.3 ± 2.1 15.4 ± 2.6 15.4 ± 3.4 0.99 16.2 ± 2.7 0.62
   Running span (adjusted accuracy rate) 0.7 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 0.66 0.8 ± 0.2 0.00***
Complex working memory
   Alpha span (adjusted accuracy rate) 0.8 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.1 0.8 ± 0.1 0.27 0.9 ± 0.1 0.00***
   Reading span (range 0–56) 40.4 ± 9.7 40.4 ± 9.9 36.6 ± 9.2 0.25 42.0 ± 7.9 0.15
   Dual virtual reality task composite measure 0.2 ± 0.6 0.1 ± 0.7 0.1 ± 0.6 0.92 0.8 ± 0.6 0.00***
      Divided attention verbal memory (range 0–12) 4 ± 1.0 4.1 ± 1.0 4.4 ± 1.3 0.46 5.3 ± 1.4 0.00***
      Divided attention visual detection (range 0–20) 18.1 ± 3.8 18.3 ± 1.9 16.4 ± 3.9 0.10 19.0 ± 1.6 0.02*

P-value for analysis of variance group effect.

*

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01;

***

p < 0.001.