A 9-Minute Publicity stunt For the Vemurafenib

Awareness Knowledge Task knowledge To estimate how well the participants�� ratings matched the actual card probabilities in the dual conditions, we calculated the mean difference scores as in Experiment 1. Figure ?Figure5A5A presents the mean difference scores of the FB and PA versions in single and dual conditions. One-way simple t-tests revealed that participants in the dual FB and PA conditions significantly underrated the actual predicative probabilities [t(24)FB = -2.94, p Vemurafenib thus indicating that the participants did not acquire accurate explicit knowledge about the predictive probability of the cards. Further, a 2 (learning style: FB vs. PA) ? 2 (task type: single vs. dual) between-subjects ANOVA revealed no significant differences in the card rating scores across the training time condition or between single and dual learning groups. FIGURE 5 Mean difference scores of probability ratings or importance ratings for dual and single conditions. (A) Mean difference scores between Tryptophan synthase probability ratings and the actual probabilities for dual and single conditions. (B) Mean difference scores between ... Self-insight To explore whether participants could discriminate between strongly predictive cards and weakly predictive cards, we calculated the mean difference scores between strongly predictive cards and weakly predictive cards. Figure ?Figure5B5B presents the mean difference scores in the dual and single conditions. One-way simple t-tests revealed that participants could significantly differentiate between strong and weak cards in the dual-FB [t(24) = 5.17, p SB431542 order = 2.14] and dual-PA conditions [t(19) = 2.15, p Furthermore, a 2 (learning style: FB vs. PA) ? 2 (task type: single vs. dual) ANOVA revealed a significant interaction effect [F(1,90) = 4.07, p