Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 14;11:1383. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-80671-w

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Reactivation during sleep did not have a suppressive effect. (a) Change in accuracy from T1 to T2 was similar for no-think pairs that were cued during sleep (S-CS; suppression–cued suppression) and those that were not (S-U; suppression–uncued). (b) A parallel analysis showed no differences in RT between the two conditions. (c) Change in accuracy was also similar when compared among the three baseline conditions, corresponding to pairs cued with the no-think sound (B-CS; baseline–cued suppression), pairs cued with a novel sound (B-CN; baseline–cued novel), and pairs that were uncued (B-U; baseline–uncued). (d) A parallel analysis was conducted for the change in RT. Values reflect coefficient estimates produced by the linear model; error bars denote standard error of the mean for coefficients.