| Parametric Coefficients . | Estimate . | Std. Error . | t Value . | p Value . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 0.0042 | 0.0086 | 0.4870 | .6262 |
| Smooth Terms . | edf . | Ref.df . | F Value . | p Value . |
| s(FOJ) | 1.0000 | 1.0001 | 22.9395 | <.0001* |
| s(SOJ) | 1.0000 | 1.0001 | 0.3052 | .5807 |
| s(SOJ accuracy) | 1.0001 | 1.0002 | 0.0775 | .7809 |
| ti(FOJ × SOJ) | 1.0012 | 1.0025 | 0.0019 | .9650 |
| ti(FOJ × SOJ Accuracy) | 1.0009 | 1.0018 | 3.9561 | .0466 |
| s(participant) | 0.0012 | 11.0000 | 0.0000 | .9999 |
| GAMM analysis: R2-locked α power, FOJ cluster, full model | ||||
| Parametric Coefficients . | Estimate . | Std. Error . | t Value . | p Value . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 0.0042 | 0.0086 | 0.4870 | .6262 |
| Smooth Terms . | edf . | Ref.df . | F Value . | p Value . |
| s(FOJ) | 1.0000 | 1.0001 | 22.9395 | <.0001* |
| s(SOJ) | 1.0000 | 1.0001 | 0.3052 | .5807 |
| s(SOJ accuracy) | 1.0001 | 1.0002 | 0.0775 | .7809 |
| ti(FOJ × SOJ) | 1.0012 | 1.0025 | 0.0019 | .9650 |
| ti(FOJ × SOJ Accuracy) | 1.0009 | 1.0018 | 3.9561 | .0466 |
| s(participant) | 0.0012 | 11.0000 | 0.0000 | .9999 |
| GAMM analysis: R2-locked α power, FOJ cluster, full model | ||||
The table displays the results of the model that was based on the data collapsed across the significant sensors, showing the main effect of FOJ, when the model was fitted on a per-sensor basis. Although FOJ × SOJ Accuracy reached significance level in the refitted model, it was not significant in the first step where model was assessed for each individual sensor and p values were corrected (see Single-trial analysis).
The asterisk signifies the factors that were significant after false discovery rate correction, applied after the same model was fitted for every sensor separately.