Table 3.
Correlations between elicited imitation memory performance and ERP familiarity response (familiar-unfamiliar) at the end of the 9-month intervention (n = 24).
| Recall of Individual Items | Recall of Ordered Pairs | |
|---|---|---|
| Nc Adaptive Mean Amplitude | ||
| Prefrontal | −0.439* | −0.373† |
| Right frontal | −0.417* | −0.411* |
| Left frontal | −0.140 | 0.001 |
| Central | −0.319 | −0.339 |
| Nc Latency to Peak Amplitude | ||
| Prefrontal | 0.005 | 0.191 |
| Right frontal | 0.043 | 0.105 |
| Left frontal | −0.394† | −0.371† |
| Central | −0.294 | −0.299 |
| PSW (area under the curve) | ||
| Prefrontal | −0.625** | −0.609** |
| Right frontal | −0.032 | −0.094 |
| Left frontal | −0.453* | −0.134 |
| Central | −0.455* | −0.290 |
Elicited imitation memory performance is standardized for age. Interpretation of a negative correlation means that better delayed recall is associated with a greater Nc amplitude for familiar stimuli (compared to unfamiliar), a shorter Nc latency to familiar stimuli (compared to unfamiliar), and a greater PSW response to unfamiliar stimuli (compared to familiar).
p < 0.10;
p < 0.05;
p < 0.01.