Table 3.

Statistical results comparing day 1 sham to day 2 anodal conditions from Experiment 2^{^a}

Category	t, p
A
ERN amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 5.01, p < 0.01
FRN amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 4.88, p < 0.01
No-stop errors	t₍₁₇₎ = 3.12, p < 0.01
Posterror slowing	t₍₁₇₎ = 3.58, p < 0.01
Posterror accuracy	t₍₁₇₎ = 3.66, p < 0.01
No-stop RT	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.63, p = 0.54
B
ERN amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 2.42, p < 0.03
FRN amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 2.34, p < 0.04
No-stop errors	t₍₁₇₎ = 2.38, p < 0.03
No-stop RT	t₍₁₇₎ = 2.25, p < 0.04
C
SSRT	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.94, p = 0.36
P (respond/stop)	t₍₁₇₎ = 1.33, p = 0.20
P (respond/no-stop)	t₍₁₇₎ = 1.10, p = 0.29
LRP amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.41, p = 0.69
LRP latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.68, p = 0.51
N2 amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.32, p = 0.75
N2 latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.36, p = 0.73
CRN amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 1.29, p = 0.22
CRN latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.46, p = 0.65
Contralateral
P1 amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.66, p = 0.52
P1 latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.21, p = 0.83
N1 amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 1.44, p = 0.17
N1 latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.57, p = 0.58
Ipsilateral
P1 amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 1.33, p = 0.20
P1 latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.75, p = 0.46
N1 amplitude	t₍₁₇₎ = 1.19, p = 0.25
N1 latency	t₍₁₇₎ = 0.25, p = 0.80

↵^aAll results from Experiment 2 replicate those obtained from Experiment 1, including the selective enhancement in the neural and behavioral indices of performance monitoring (A), the enhancement of neural and behavioral indices of learning (B, statistics based on learning rate parameter estimates), and the findings that numerous other neural and behavioral measures indexing other cognitive mechanisms were not significantly modulated by medial–frontal tDCS (C).