Table 3.
Component analysis | 4 (condition) × 4 (run) ANOVA interaction statistic | Simple main effect | Pairwise comparison | p value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Left CEN | F(5.11, 66.64) = 2.81, p < .05* | Conditions | Rest | Run 1 < run 4 | <.01 |
Run 1 < run 3 | <.01 | ||||
Regulate | Run 1 < run 4 | <.01 | |||
View | ns | ||||
Neutral | ns | ||||
Runs | Run 1 | Regulate < view | <.05 | ||
View > rest | <.005 | ||||
Neutral > rest | <.005 | ||||
Run2 | ns | ||||
Run 3 | ns | ||||
Run 4 | ns | ||||
Right CEN | F(4.20, 54.63) = 2.84, p < .05* | Condition | Rest | ns | |
Regulate | Run 2 > run 4 | <.01 | |||
Run 3 > run 4 | <.05 | ||||
View | Run 1 > run 4 | <.05 | |||
Neutral | Run 1 > run 3 | <.05 | |||
Run 1 > run 4 | <.001 | ||||
Run 2 > run 4 | <.05 | ||||
Run 3 > run 4 | <.05 | ||||
Runs | Run 1 | Regulate > rest | <.05 | ||
View > rest | <.005 | ||||
Neutral > rest | <.005 | ||||
Run 2 | ns | ||||
Run 3 | ns | ||||
Run 4 | ns | ||||
DMN | F(5.43, 70.60) = 3.97, p = .002 | Conditions | Rest | Run 1 < run 2 | <.01 |
Run 1 < run 3 | <.01 | ||||
Run 1 < run 4 | <.01 | ||||
Regulate | ns | ||||
View | ns | ||||
Neutral | ns | ||||
Runs | Run 1 | Rest < regulate | <.005 | ||
Rest < view | <.005 | ||||
Rest < neutral | <.005 | ||||
View > neutral | <.05 | ||||
Run 2 | ns | ||||
Run 3 | ns | ||||
Run 4 | ns | ||||
SN | ns |
Interaction and follow‐up comparison results for the 4 Condition × 4 Run repeated measures ANOVA. Runs 1–3 consist of amygdala downregulation neurofeedback training runs, and run 4 is the transfer run without neurofeedback. Asterisks indicate ANOVAS where assumptions of sphericity were violated and a Huynh–Feldt correction was applied. CEN = central executive network; DMN = default mode network; SN = salience network.