Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 2;50(7):1381–1398. doi: 10.3758/s13421-022-01294-2

Table 2.

Results of ANOVAs comparing face–upfix dyads across Matching (M) and Conventionality (C) for both central and peripheral regions of interest

200-300ms 300-500ms 500-700ms
Central Peripheral Central Peripheral Central Peripheral
F η2p F η2p F η2p F η2p F η2p F η2p
M 8.8** 0.32 3.8^ 0.17 9.3** 0.13 9.6** 0.34 12.1** 0.15 3.8^ 0.17
C 17.3*** 0.48 6.8* 0.27 4.7* 0.07 0.59 0.03 0.27 0.01 0.11 0.01
M*C 10.2** 0.35 0.18 0.01 1.7 0.02 1.8 0.09 1.2 0.01 0.35 0.02
M*AP 0.93 0.05 1.8 0.09 0.09 0.004
C*AP 0.86 0.04 0.25 0.01 0.43 0.02
M*H 0.09 0.01 0.002 <.001 0.26 0.01
C*H 0.12 0.01 1.4 0.07 0.01 <.001
M*C*AP 4.2^ 0.18 1.8 0.09 0.01 <.001
M*C*H 5.4* 0.22 0.62 0.03 2.8 0.13
M*AP*H 1.5 0.07 3.5^ 0.16 6.3* 0.25
C*AP*H 6.1* 0.2 2.1^ 0.14 1.99 0.1
M*C*AP*H 1.2 0.06 0.3 0.02 4.0^ 0.17

H Hemisphere, AP Anterior-Posterior Distribution. ^p < .1, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. df = 1, 19