Перегляд вихідного коду сторінки Gossip, Lies In Addition To The MG-132

In contrast, there was no effect of hemifield alignment in the standard search task (Figure 4b). A three-way ANOVA was run on reaction time with search task (subset versus standard), set size (2, 4), and hemifield (bilateral versus unilateral) as factors. There was a main effect of hemifield (F[1,8] = 6.7, p = 0.03, ��2 = .46), but the interaction between task and hemifield was not reliable (F[1,8] = 2.0, p = 0.19, ��2 = .20). Based on the results of Experiments 1 and 2, we expected there to be a hemifield effect only at higher set sizes of the spatial subset search task. Thus, we also conducted planned, focused analyses to test these predictions. A two-way ANOVA was run on [http://www.selleckchem.com/products/MG132.html MG-132 datasheet] reaction time for the subset search task with set size (2, 4) and hemifield alignment (bilateral versus unilateral) as factors. Reaction times [http://www.selleckchem.com/products/Rapamycin.html Rapamycin] were slower at the largest set size (F[1,8] = 59.386, p  than in the bilateral condition. Focused t-tests comparing reaction times in the bilateral versus unilateral alignment at set size 2 (t[8] = 0.915, p = 0.387, r2 = .095) and set size 4 (t[8] = 2.687, p = 0.028, r2 = .474) revealed that a hemifield effect was present at the largest set size (4) but not at the smallest set size (2). A two-way ANOVA was run on reaction time for the standard search task with set size (2, 4) and hemifield alignment (bilateral versus unilateral) as factors. As expected, reaction times were slower at the largest set size (F[1,8] = 17.99, p [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycoplasma MycoClean Mycoplasma Removal Kit] reaction times in the bilateral versus unilateral alignment at set size 2 (t[8] = 0.210, p = 0.839, r2 = .005) and set size 4 (t[8] = 1.38, p = 0.204, r2 = .193), confirming that a hemifield effect was not present at either set size. Experiment 3B: Controlling for eye movements in feature subset search Experiment 3B used the same procedure as Experiment 3A except that the task-relevant items were always white, while task-irrelevant items in the subset search task were black. Thus, the targets could be selected based on this salient feature difference.