Table 2.
Results of the linear mixed model (LMM) performed on the reaction times (RTs) and error rates (ERs) in Experiment 2.
| Numerator df | Denominator df | F-value | p-value | Cohen's d | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RT | |||||
| Stimulation | 2 | 717.85 | 3.98 | .019* | .350 |
| Person-specific information | 1 | 718.17 | 1.12 | .290 | .169 |
| Stimulation × person-specific information | 2 | 716.36 | .52 | .595 | .137 |
| ER | |||||
| Stimulation | 2 | 75.23 | 2.68 | .075 | .447 |
| Person-specific information | 1 | 71.24 | 4.19 | .044* | .552 |
| Error type | 1 | 73.70 | 1.06 | .308 | .279 |
| Stimulation × person-specific information | 2 | 69.24 | .49 | .613 | .323 |
| Stimulation × error type | 2 | 72.56 | 3.73 | .029* | .456 |
| Person-specific information x error type | 1 | 70.52 | 2.54 | .115 | .339 |
| Stimulation × person-specific information × error type | 2 | 71.64 | .88 | .418 | .368 |
In the model, each participant was treated as a random factor (random intercept model). The within-subjects factors stimulation (anodal, cathodal and sham) and person-specific information (surnames, professions) were treated as fixed-effect covariates for the RT model. The within-subject factor error type was added to the model of the ER. Asterisks indicate significant results (p < 0.05). df, Degrees of freedom.