Table 2.

Additional statistical tests of the pairwise and within-sample effects

ROI	Comparison	Wilcoxon	BEST 95% CI	Hedges’s g	Cohen’s d
Frontal	Dancers: stim. cond.	V = 135, p = 0.11	0.36 [−0.12, 0.83]	0.52 [−0.07, 1.11]	0.473 [0.005, 0.83]
	Signers: stim. cond.	V = 7, p = 0.009	−0.61 [−0.99, −0.23]	−1.21 [−2.14, −0.28]	−1.03 [−2.35, −0.39]
	Dance: subj. group	W = 185, p = 0.003	0.75 [0.29, 1.2]	1.06 [0.28, 1.84]	1.19 [0.65, 1.99]
	Sign: subj. group	W = 89, p = 0.3	−0.26 [−0.75, 0.24]	−0.39 [−1.13 0.35]	−0.40 [−1.39, 0.31]
	Dancers watching dance	V = 178, p = 0.0003	0.79 [0.37, 1.2]	0.89 [−0.08, 1.85]	0.93 [0.56, 1.45]
	Dancers watching sign	V = 152, p = 0.02	0.38 [0.074, 0.70]	0.59 [−0.35, 1.53]	0.62 [0.21, 1.14]
	Signers watching dance	V = 44, p = 0.7	0.046 [−0.15, 0.24]	0.12 [−1.05, 1.29]	0.13 [−0.48, 0.94]
	Signers watching sign	V = 74, p = 0.003	0.65 [0.24, 1.0]	1.03 [−0.22, 2.28]	1.12 [0.54, 2.64]
Occipital	Dancers: stim. cond.	V = 84, p = 0.7	−0.094 [−0.49, 0.29]	−0.25 [−0.94, 0.43]	−0.17 [−0.59, 0.4]
	Signers: stim. cond.	V = 24, p = 0.3	−0.24 [−0.63, 0.15]	−0.48 [−1.18, 0.23]	−0.43 [−1.1, 0.15]
	Dance: subj. group	W = 154, p = 0.1	0.31 [−0.03, 0.64]	0.70 [−0.05, 1.46]	0.75 [0.14, 1.47]
	Sign: subj. group	W = 145, p = 0.2	0.23 [−0.22, 0.69]	0.36 [−0.38, 1.10]	0.37 [−0.4, 1.3]
	Dancers watching dance	V = 174, p = 0.0006	0.47 [0.23, 0.73]	0.91 [−0.05, 1.88]	0.95 [0.58, 1.49]
	Dancers watching sign	V = 184, p = 0.00005	0.59 [0.30, 0.89]	0.99 [0.02, 1.97]	1.04 [0.75, 1.53]
	Signers watching dance	V = 56, p = 0.2	0.16 [−0.066, 0.39]	0.43 [−0.76, 1.62]	0.47 [−0.1, 1.39]
	Signers watching sign	V = 71, p = 0.009	0.34 [−0.001, 0.72]	0.65 [−0.55, 1.86]	0.71 [0.44, 1.22]

Columns show the ROI; the comparison being tested (e.g., dancers: stim. cond. is the effect of stimulus condition within dancers); non-parametric Wilcoxon tests; Bayesian estimates with 95% credible interval; Hedges’s g with 95% CI; Cohen’s d with 95% CI.