Control experiment: effect of filtering on reaction times and accuracya
| Condition | Reaction times (s) | Accuracy (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UF | F1 | F2 | UF | F1 | F2 | |
| Global | 0.898 ± 0.035 | 0.901 ± 0.038 | 0.913 ± 0.039 | 95 ± 1 | 95 ± 0.01 | 96 ± 0.1 |
| Main effect of filtering | F(1.312,16) = 0.95, p > 0.3 | F(1.858,16) = 2.6, p > 0.09 | ||||
| Local | 1065 ± 27 | 1005 ± 34 | 995 ± 31 | 93 ± 2 | 95 | 94 ± 1 |
| Main effect of filtering | F(1.680,16) = 20.5, p < 0.001 | F(1.369,16) = 1.4, p > 0.2 | ||||
| T(16) p value | 8.22, p < 0.001 | 4.44, p < 0.001 | 3, p < 0.01 | −0.8, p > 0.3 | 0.7, p > 0.4 | 1.3, p > 0.18 |
↵aData are mean ± SEM. Reaction times and accuracy in the global and local tasks (Control experiment), for unfiltered stimuli (UF) and at 2 different levels of high-pass filtering (F1 and F2). The main effect of the ANOVA in both tasks, and t test (global vs local task) over reaction times and accuracy are reported. There is no effect of filtering in the global task on either reaction times or accuracy. Reaction times are shorter in the global task whatever the level of filtering. The Greenhouse-Geisser correction for the degrees of freedom was applied when appropriate.