Table 1.

Percentiles of each monkey's actual meta-scores compared with the simulated data for all three tasks in which no impairment was found^{^a}

Group ID	Temporal variant φ	Temporal variant meta d′/d′	Temporal variant H-model meta d′/d′	Spatial variant φ	Spatial variant meta d′/d′	Spatial variant H-model meta d′/d′	WCST φ	WCST meta d′/d′	WCST H-model meta d′/d′
CON 1	99.5	99.5	99.5	99.5	99	99	99.5	99.5	99.5
CON 2	99.5	99.5	99.5	89	89	93	99.5	99.5	99
CON 3	99.5	99.5	99.5	76.5	76.5	83	99.5	91	85
CON 4	99	99	99	96.5	96.5	96	99.5	99.5	99
CON 5	99	99	99	83	83	88	99.5	99.5	99.5
CON 6	99.5	99.5	99.5	75.5	75.5	84	99.5	99.5	97
CON 7	99.5	99.5	99.5
Statistics for CON	0.01⁷ < 0.001	0.01⁷ < 0.001	0.01⁷ < 0.001	0.245⁶ < 0.001	0.245⁶ < 0.001	0.17⁶ < 0.001	0.005⁶ < 0.001	0.09⁶ < 0.001	0.15⁶ < 0.001
OFC 1	99	93	93	94	94	84	99.5	99.5	99.5
OFC 2	93	99.5	99.5	94	99	99	99.5	99.5	99.5
OFC 3	99.5	99	99	89	98	98	99.5	99.5	99.5
Statistics for OFC	0.07³ < 0.001	0.07³ < 0.001	0.07³ < 0.001	0.11³ < 0.001	0.06³ < 0.001	0.16³ = 0.0040	0.005³ < 0.001	0.005³ < 0.001	0.005³ < 0.001
sdlPFC 1	99.5	99	99	48^{^b}	1^{^b}	1^{^b}	99.5	99.5	99.5
sdlPFC 2	96	81	89	68^{^b}	83^{^b}	83^{^b}	99.5	99.5	99
sdlPFC 3	99.5	99.5	99.5	48^{^b}	48^{^b}	48^{^b}	99.5	99	99
Statistics for sdlPFC	0.04³ < 0.001	0.19³ = 0.006	0.11³ = 0.0013	0.52³ = 0.140^{^b}	0.99³ = 0.970^{^b}	0.99³ = 0.970^{^b}	0.005³ < 0.001	0.01³ < 0.001	0.01³ < 0.001

↵^aThe inferential statistics are performed using a minimum statistics method (Nichols et al., 2005), showing that the real unimpaired monkeys' meta-scores are all significantly higher than chance level.
↵^bNot reaching significance.